TOWN OF ADDISON...Jun 11, 2019 · Addison, Texas’ 2019 Bond Advisory Committee . Executive...

0

TOWN OF ADDISON

COMMUNITY BOND ADVISORY COMMITTEE FINAL REPORT

June 11, 2019

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL 4

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 7

COMMUNITY BOND ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBERS AND COUNCIL APPOINTMENTS 16

COMMUNITY BOND ADVISORY COMMITTEE ATTENDANCE RECORD 18

MEETING JANUARY 30, 2019 20

AGENDA 21 KICK OFF MEETING PRESENTATION- LISA PYLES 22 NOTES 42

MEETING FEBRUARY 11, 2019 45

AGENDA 46 PROCESS OVERVIEW- RALPH DOHERTY 47 FACILITIES- ROB BOURESTOM 58 NOTES 68


AGENDA 72 STREETS- JASON SHROYER 73 PROJECT REVIEW- RALPH DOHERTY 98 NOTES 110

MEETING MARCH 11, 2019 114

AGENDA 115 FACILITIES- ROB BOURESTOM 116 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY- HAMID KHALEGHIPOUR 133 PARKS AND RECREATION- JANNA TIDWELL 149 SPECIAL AREA STUDY LAND ACQUISITION- CHARLES GOFF 168 NOTES 174

MEETING APRIL 04, 2019 177

AGENDA 178 NOTES 179

2


AGENDA 182 FINANCIAL OVERVIEW- OLIVIA RILEY & NICK BULAICH 183 NOTES 201

MEETING MAY 02, 2019 203

AGENDA 204 KEYPAD POLLING RESULTS 205 ONLINE SURVEY RESULTS 231 NOTES 296





PRESENTED PROJECT COSTS AND ASSET MANAGEMENT SCORE 307

FINAL PROPOSITION RECOMMENDATIONS WITH ASSET MANAGEMENT SCORES AND PROJECTED COSTS 309

3

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL 4

4

Letter of Transmittal

Date: June 11, 2019

To: The Hon. Joe Chow, Mayor, Town of Addison, Texas The Hon. Members of the Town Council, Town of Addison, Texas – Ms. Lori Ward, Messrs. Tom Braun, Ivan Hughes, Guillermo Quintanilla, Paul Walden and Marlin Willesen

From: Ralph Doherty, Chair, Addison 2019 Bond Advisory Committee

Copy: Mr. Wes Pierson, City Manager, Town of Addison Ms. Lisa Pyles, Director of Public Works and Engineering Services, Town of Addison Directors and Senior Staff, Town of Addison Members, Addison 2019 Bond Advisory Committee

Subject: 2019 Community Bond Advisory Committee Report to Council

Dear Mayor and Council:

After months of gathering data, asking hard questions, and debating vigorously, the 2019 Town of

Addison Bond Advisory Committee recommends a targeted, five-part bond issue valued at $85.62

million. We believe that these five issuances address Addison’s current needs while also opening the

door to future growth.

The 28-member committee (see attached roster), appointed by the Mayor and City Council, had one of

the highest participation rates of past committees, demonstrating our commitment. The committee

members’ questions regarding project costs and scope, as well as tax rates and timing of obligations,

showed our fiscal responsibility. After much deliberation, we reduced the original $223 million proposal,

to $85.62 and chose to divide the projects into five categories to provide voters’ understanding.

While we did not agree on everything, the committee did agree that the Town’s staff, led by Ms. Lisa

Pyles, Director of Public Works and Engineering Services, did a great job being open and transparent

about the realities facing Addison and its infrastructure. We appreciated the honest, detailed reports, as

well as the staff’s candid and timely responses to our questions.

We asked tough questions about the state of our assets, the timing on various requests, and the

forecasting and management of those assets to properly plan for replacement. City Manager Wes

Pierson and Lisa Pyles both made it clear that the new Town Asset Management Report gave Addison

a framework to identify all of these in a timely fashion, as well as to create a plan to monitor these

5

assets more closely in the future. In addition, the arrival of the new Cotton Belt station added a new

time pressure for addressing many of these issues.

The Committee was mindful of the need for transparency in its deliberations and stewardship of its

responsibilities, and the financial implications of much needed road repairs, facility improvements, and

service enhancements. The members and Town staff were challenged to consider the impact of their

decisions on all of Addison’s constituents – those who live, work, and/or play here.

Changes to tax structure of any kind are certain to draw public scrutiny. Should Addison voters approve

all five bond propositions ($85.62 million), assuming the recommended projects are constructed when

planned, we could face an average property tax increase of $0.11 per $100 valuation. The Committee

recognized the need to balance the potential impact on the tax rate against responsible asset

management.

It is important to note that approving municipal tax rate changes do not always result in an increase in

taxes. For example, in 2012 Addison voters approved a tax increase, yet through astute financial

management by staff and market reality, the Town has been able to fund projects, retire obligations,

and, when necessary, increase debt while NOT raising the Town’s debt tax rate. In fact, Addison’s tax

rate has actually decreased in recent years.

Given the town’s fiscally responsible record, the recent upgrade of our bond rating, and the

transparency of the staff throughout this process, the Committee supports the attached

recommendations as reasonable, affordable, and necessary improvements that will keep Addison

moving forward and relevant into the future.

Therefore, in response to its charter and after thorough study, the Committee recommends that the

Council approve the projects so designated in this report and move forward with a municipal bond

election asking our citizens to invest further in the community.

As requested, the Bond Advisory Committee stands ready to assist in this effort as the Town Council

feels appropriate.

Respectfully submitted.

6

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 7

7

Addison, Texas’ 2019 Bond Advisory Committee

Executive Summary

OVERVIEW

Tasked with evaluating the state of the Town of Addison’s infrastructure and future planning

needs, the 2019 Addison Bond Advisory Committee was formed to work with town staff and

advise the Mayor and City Council as to the Committee’s view regarding (a) whether a bond

issue was needed, and (b) if so, for which projects and for what amounts.

The 28-member committee met nine times over a five-month period with an average

attendance of 86%, one of the highest rates of involvement as noted by Town staff. During this

time, the committee explored approximately $223 million in projects identified by the Town staff.

After much discussion, research, and work with staff, the committee recommends five bond

propositions for a total of $85.62 million.

APPROACH

During the fall of 2018, the Addison City Council first discussed the need to identify, define, and

prioritize important projects necessary to maintain the Town’s infrastructure and prominent

competitive position among its Metroplex peers. Ongoing discussions, partly driven by the

institution of a structured Asset Management process initiative, resulted in the decision to

empanel a citizen’s advisory committee to explore these needs and to recommend actions to

the Mayor and City Council.

Council and city management chose this community outreach format to combine citizen and

senior staff expertise based on national data and best practices that show successful bond

issues involve a bridge between the town and the residents it serves. Initial appointments to this

very important committee, four per councilmember, began in November 2018 and concluded in

early January 2019. The organizational/kickoff meeting of the newly constituted committee was

held on January 30, 2019.

8

STAFF AND COMMITTEE COOPERATION

The City Manager made members of the Town’s senior management team available to the

group and charged them with answering Committee questions and contributing their expertise

and advice to committee members. This expertise was very helpful to the Committee.

The City Manager designated Ms. Lisa Pyles, Addison’s Director of Public Works and

Engineering Services, to serve the Committee (and staff) as a liaison to the Town and

coordinator of needed resources. Ms. Pyles began by conducting the organizational meeting of

the Committee and briefing the Committee members on the background of Bond Elections,

including parameters typically considered for bond eligible projects.

COUNCIL EXPECTATIONS

An important part of Ms. Pyles’ briefing involved reviewing the Council’s expectations for the

Committee:

• To assess and review information related to proposed future capital projects;

• To make a recommendation to Council as to whether a bond election should be called;

• If choosing to recommend a bond election, to provide input in developing a final list of

proposed projects; and

• To serve as community advocates for the bond program election, if Council decides to

call one.

COMMITTEE ORGANIZATION

The Committee elected two members to lead the committee: Chair Ralph Doherty and Vice-

Chair Bruce Arfsten. In a subsequent action the Chair appointed Dialog Managers for each

functional area. These managers were selected and tasked to work with Addison’s staff to

facilitate the exchange of information between the Committee and the Town, including providing

information to the Committee regarding their assigned area when the Addison senior manager

was absent. Committee members serving in this capacity were:

9

• General Services - Colleen Campbell

• Infrastructure – Lary Brown

• Parks - Kent Domingue

• IT - Edwin Keith

• Finance - Taylor Bowen and Nancy Craig

SENIOR STAFF PARTICIPATION

As part of the Committee’s work, staff made presentations regarding each functional area of the

town having bond-eligible needs. These meetings began in earnest in February and continued

into early April with background briefings conducted by members of Addison’s senior

management team as follows:

• General Services 1 & 2 – Rob Bourestom

• Infrastructure/Streets– Jason Shroyer

• Parks – Janna Tidwell

• IT – Hamid Khaleghipour

• Special Area Studies – Charles Goff

• Municipal Finance – Olivia Riley

• Debt Capacity – Nick Bulaich (Hilltop Securities, consultant)

The content of each briefing followed a similar pattern, including a review of the department’s

scope of responsibility, current status, and high priority needs. After understanding each

project’s details and ranking them by importance based on various criteria, the committee then

turned its focus to estimated cost and time information. Each Director entertained questions

from the Committee and provided additional information when asked.

PROJECT PRIORITIZATION

Following the last of the functional presentations, the Committee and staff identified 21 bond-

eligible projects. Subsequently, the Committee met to rank or prioritize each project in

10

consultant-led sessions using electronic keyboards combined with an online survey tool used to

score each participant’s individual choices (votes). Following the completion of these two

exercises, the consultant. Ms. Karen Waltz, presented the summary results to the group and led

a discussion on the conclusions drawn.

This unique approach – capturing each individual’s perspective and calculating individual scores

(as well as the total) for each project – ensured that every participant’s voice was heard and that

their opinions were factored into the final result. The same approach was used with Addison’s

staff and provided an interesting comparison of results – both the staff and Committee had

almost identical results for the top seven items. There was also significant agreement as to

which projects could be deferred. These results supported the validity of the approach and the

importance of the briefings and staff support in studying the proposed projects.

RECOMMENDED PROJECTS

Once the ranking exercises and mathematical weighting of each individual project were

completed, the Committee initiated discussions focused on combining proposals into groups

that would best present the projects to voters for ease of understanding and to provide options.

The Committee divided the recommended projects into the following five proposal categories:

• Priority Road Projects: Road/traffic assets that have lived beyond their usefulness and

are “code red” in the Town’s Asset Management report

• Key Road Projects: Road/traffic assets that are nearing the end of their usefulness and

are “code yellow” in the Town’s Asset Management report

• Building Improvement Projects: Facilities that are at or near the end of their useful life;

that violate the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) or other federal statutes; and/or

otherwise do not function as needed

• Recreation and Lifestyle Projects: Athletic Center and outdoor assets that are at or

near the end of their useful life, and/or that violate ADA or other federal statutes

• Investing in the Future Project: Funds earmarked for potential land purchases by the

Town to address future development that require timely action

Attach red/yellow spreadsheet to the Exec Summary

11

IMPORTANT QUESTIONS

QUESTION #1: Is a bond election necessary for Addison?

The Committee agreed that a bond issue is necessary to address important infrastructure repair

projects. This decision was based on the definition of “bond-eligible” that included a one-time

investment as opposed to on-going maintenance and a long-lived asset, as opposed to an

asset/project that would be completed and used within a year. Several projects, such as the

HVAC systems that rely on the banned substance, Freon, and the failing lining of the Les Lacs

storm water pond, made it clear that a bond issue was needed.

QUESTION #2: Can Addison support a bond election from a fiscal standpoint?

Based on the Town’s fiscal status indicators, including its implementation of the Asset

Management report, its history with previous bond elections, as well as bond ratings that are at

the highest achievable levels (Standard & Poor’s (AAA) and Moody’s (its recently upgraded

from Aa1 to Aaa)), Committee members believed that the Town of Addison could support a

general obligation bond issuance. At the same time, Committee members decided that the

recommended projects were appropriate and fiscally responsible.

QUESTION #3: Which projects should be included in a bond election, and at what

amount?

After agreeing that a bond issue was necessary, the Committee discussed and evaluated which

projects should be included, exploring the details to determine costs that could be removed or

reduced. By consensus, the Committee decided to recommend a total package of $85.62 million

out of the total of $223 million in identified projects to the Council, including the following

projects and costs (in millions) – *See Note below:

12

PROPOSED PROJECTS

(In millions)

• Proposition One – Priority Road Projects

o Advanced Traffic Management System (0.6)

o Keller Springs Road (12.9)

o Airport Parkway (9.4)

o Total Proposition One (22.9)

• Proposition Two – Key Road Projects

o Quorum Drive ( 26.302)

o Montfort Drive (7.3)

o Total Proposition Two (33.602)

• Proposition Three – Building Maintenance/Improvement Projects

o ADA Compliance (1.5)

o Roof Replacements (4.0)

o HVAC Replacements (1.895)

o Total Proposition Three (7.395)

• Proposition Four – Lifestyle Projects

o Athletic Club (3.028)

o Les Lacs Pond (3.282)

o Trail Improvements (0.413)

o Total Proposition Four (6.723)

• Proposition Five – Strategic Investments

o Land Acquisition (15.0)

o Total Proposition Five (15.0)

• Total Recommended Bond Package (85.620)

13

*NOTE – Proposed propositions fully explained in Appendix

APPRECIATION

There are many to thank for their numerous contributions to the content and conclusions of the

Committee’s report to the Council, among them the:

• Mayor and Council – For recognizing the need to study and appointing the Committee

members

• Committee – For enthusiastically participating in the Committee and investing of

themselves to guarantee the quality of the final results. For recognizing that everyone

learns differently and supporting their colleagues in developing the final

recommendations, and for treating the staff with the respect and appreciation that they

richly deserve

• Committee Leadership – For participating in the overall direction of the Committee,

spending significant amounts of time preparing for meetings and documenting the

results. For creating the Dialog Management effort, guaranteeing the quality of the

exchange of information between the Committee and the senior staff

• Dialog Managers – For agreeing to work with the Town’s senior staff in order to improve

the information flow and ultimate result of the Committee’s deliberations. For contributing

to the environment of trust, respect, and mutual support much in evidence during

deliberations

• City Manager – For supporting the Committee and making the senior staff members

available for the effort. For contributing to the dialog and providing much needed

perspective as required

• Senior Staff – For enthusiastically supporting the Committee, its members, and mission,

and for being open to questions and transparent in providing the information requested

• Ms. Lisa Pyles – For accepting the challenge of leading her colleagues, spending

countless hours in gathering and preparing the required information, and meeting with

the Committee and its elected leadership in order to shape the process and

recommendations

14

• Town Administration and Treehouse Staff – For providing needed support in hosting

the Committee’s meetings

• Ms. Karen Waltz – Consultant. For leading the Committee and Staff in the exploration of

the key issues facing Addison and conducting a process guaranteeing that every

participants’ voice would be heard

• Document Editing – Ms. Juli Branson and Mr. Lary Brown for editing the Letter of

Transmittal and Executive Summary, several times, incorporating the (seemingly

endless) adds/deletes. A superb job, especially turnaround to meet tight deadlines

CLOSING COMMENTS

The members of Addison Community Bond Advisory Committee took their responsibilities

seriously. The group prepared for meetings, studied the issues, debated choices, and

developed bond-worthy recommendations after a thorough exploration of the state of the

Town’s infrastructure. Important components of Committee dialog centered on the proposed

projects’ current status, Asset Management Assessment status/scores, and how to propose a

set of investments giving the Council, the staff, and the citizens the insight that the time for

these investments is now. The Committee believes that this executive summary and

accompanying documents does so.

The Committee concluded that the recently adopted Asset Management process and

accompanying rating system offers fact-based guidance to the Council and staff as to the

necessity of investing in the timely maintenance of Addison’s assets – infrastructure. The Asset

Management process and rating system offers a superb planning tool to all involved. It points

out in an unbiased fashion what investments should be made and the optimum timing of them in

order to maintain the “health” of the town, our superb credit rating, and Addison’s fiscal

management reputation. We trust that the current and future Councils will place high value and

credibility in these capabilities.

15

COMMUNITY BOND ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBERS AND COUNCIL APPOINTMENTS 16

16

Name Resident Business Council MemberNancy E. Craig Yes NA QuinanillaMary Jo Cater Yes NA ChowSusan M. Halpern Yes NA WaldenVirginia Wallace Yes NA WardNancy Williams Yes NA QuinanillaRobert L Catalani Yes NA WardColleen Campbell Yes NA ChowEileen Resnik Yes NA WillesenSuzann Oliver Yes NA BraunEdwin Keith Yes NA HughesRalph Doherty Yes NA WardKent Domingue Yes NA WaldenCraig Reynolds Yes NA WillesenTaylor Bowen No Real Estate Development BraunLiz Oliphant Yes NA WardJimmy Niemann Yes NA BraunBruce Arfsten Yes NA QuinanillaDenise Quintanilla Yes NA ChowLary Brown Yes NA WillesenJason Rivera Yes NA QuinanillaDarren Gardner Yes NA WaldenBrooks Haley Yes NA WaldenMargie Gunther Yes NA HughesChris DeFrancisco Yes NA BraunJerry Dougan Yes NA ChowJT McPherson Yes NA HughesRob Wright Yes NA WillesenJuli R Branson Yes Branson Ink Hughes

17

COMMUNITY BOND ADVISORY COMMITTEE ATTENDANCE RECORD 18

18

Committee Members 30-Jan 11-Feb 25-Feb 11-Mar 4-Apr 18-Apr 2-May 9-May 23-May

Arfsten, Bruce X X X X X X X X X

Bowen, Taylor X X X X X X X

Branson, Juli X X X X X X X X

Brown, Lary X X X X X X X X X

Campbell, Colleen X X X X X X X

Catalani, Robert X X X X X X X X X

Cater, Mary Jo X X X X X X X

Craig, Nancy X X X X X X

DeFrancisco, Chris X X X X X X X

Doherty, Ralph X X X X X X X X

Domingue, Kent X X X X X X X X X

Dougan, Jerry X X X X X X X X

Gardner, Darren X X X X X X

Gunther, Margie X X X X X X X X

Haley, Brooks X X X X X X

Halpern, Susan X X X X X X

Keith, Edwin X X X X X X X X

McPherson, JT X X X X X X X X X

Niemann, Jimmy X X X X X X X X

Oliphant, Liz X X X X X X X X

Oliver, Suzann X X X X X X X

Quintanilla, Denise X X X X X X

Resnik, Eileen X X X X X X X

Reynolds, Craig X X X X X X X X X

Rivera, Jason X X X X X X X X

Wallace, Virginia X X X X X X X X

Williams, Nancy X X X X X X X X

Wright, Rob X X X X X X X X

Total Attended 28 25 23 20 22 24 26 25 21

% Attended 100% 89% 82% 71% 79% 86% 93% 89% 75%

19

MEETING JANUARY 30, 2019 20

AGENDA 21 KICK OFF MEETING PRESENTATION- LISA PYLES 22 NOTES 42

20

Community Bond Advisory Committee

January 30, 2019 Addison Conference Center, Acacia Room

5:30 to 7:30

1. Greeting - Mayor Chow

2. Committee and Staff introductions

3. Purpose and Role of the Committee

4. Bond program development process

5. Bond election process and schedule

6. Long-term needs and the Asset Management Plan

7. Project selection and scoring methodology

8. Basics of municipal debt financing

9. Financial capacity to issue debt

10. Written report and recommendation to Council

11. Structure and topics of future meetings

12. Upcoming meeting schedule

13. Election of Committee Chair, Vice-Chair, and Secretary

14. Questions / Discussion

15. Adjourn

21

Community Bond Advisory Committee Kick-Off

Meeting

Addison Conference Center – Acacia RoomJanuary 30, 2019

1

Introductions – Committee and Staff

2

22

Purpose and Role of the Community Bond Committee

3

Purpose and Role of the Committee

To assess and review information related to proposed futurecapital projects; To provide input in developing a final list of projects; To make a recommendation to Council concerning whether a

bond election should be called and, if so, what projects shouldbe included; and To serve as community advocates for the bond program

election, if Council decides to call an election

4

23

Bond Program Development Process

5

Bond Program Development Process

6

1. Staff provides information about proposed projects gathered from theasset management plan, capital improvement plans, master plans, andother evaluations and assessments.

2. Staff provides estimated project cost and debt capacity information.3. Committee will score the projects according to their agreed upon criteria4. Community Bond Advisory Committee ranks each project on a scale of 1-

10; 1 being the highest5. Committee’s ranking are averaged with Staff’s ranking6. The Committee issues an advisory report to Council listing selected

projects in priority order and proposed propositions7. Council determines whether to call a bond election, and, if so, when, and

the amount of the bond program

24

Bond Election Process and Schedule

7

Bond Election Process

• Project Inventory/Listing developedInventory

• Bond Advisory Committee established by CouncilCommittee

• Bond Advisory Committee Provides RecommendationsRecommendations

• Proceed According to Bond Election ScheduleElection Schedule

• Hold ElectionElection

• Consider Bond Issuance OptionsFinancing

8

25

9

Call bond election

Publish notice of election

Post notice of election

Early voting

Election Day

Canvass election

Bond Sale

Bond Election Schedule

August 7 - 19

October 6 - 22

October 15

October 21 - Nov 1

November 5

November 8 - 18

December

November 2019 Proposed Election Date

Action

Community Advisory Committee Important Dates

10

January to May, 2019 Committee deliberations

June 2019 Committee report

delivered to Council

August 2019 Deadline to order election, if so

directed

November 5, 2019 Bond election

26

Identifying Long-Term Needs

11

Lessons learned from prior issuances

12

Develop complete project scope and high level cost estimates December 11th Council approved a contract with Jacobs Engineering Group for the

development of street project costs Cost estimates from master plans and other evaluations and assessments

Consider availability of projects resources Financial and staffing capacity Consider disruption to businesses and public in timing of projects

Align debt issuances with Town’s strategic plan pillars and community needs Entrepreneurship and business hub Gold standard in financial health, customer service, and public safety Excellence in asset management and transportation systems Optimization of the Addison brand

27

Asset Management Plan

13

Purpose of the Asset Management Plan

“To manage assets to minimize the total cost of owning, operating, and maintaining those assets, while delivering the desired service level at an

acceptable level of risk.”

14

28

Moving from Reactive to Proactive

15

Asset Management Objectives

1. Consolidate what we know about our assets2. Create an inventory of the assets3. Determine the current state and future needs of the needs4. Assess risk for each asset and prioritize those needs based

on the risk5. Develop strategies to balance cost, risk, funding, and staffing6. Provide a logical, transparent, and defendable decision-

making process

16

29

Asset Management Assessment Product

17

Asset Management Grading Scale

18

30

Grading Example

19

Park Management System

$ ,

$ , ,

0.003or0.3%A

Asset Management System Grades

20

Good news ‐ overall, the condition of our assets is goodExcellent, Very Good – 49%Good/Fair – 47% Poor, Failed/Critical – 4%

31

Project Selection Process

21

Project Overview and Selection Process

Staff developed a list of projects using Asset Management Plan,Capital Improvement Plans, Master Plans, and otherevaluations and assessmentsEstablish criteria to uniformly evaluate projectsApply the criteria to each project and award 10 points for each

criteria that is metMaximum possible points – 100 Score from 1 – 10, 1 being the highest priority and 10 being the lowest

priority Apply to each projects

Other projects the committee may bring forward

22

32

Project Process Decision Hierarchy

23

Development of Project List

Town Staff Task Force Applies Criteria to all

Projects

Community Bond Committee

Project Ranking

Staff’s Score and Community Bond Committee Score

averaged for an Overall Ranking

Report and Recommendation to

Council

Project Evaluation and Scoring –Staff and Community Bond

Advisory Committee

24

33

Staff Criteria for Evaluation and Scoring

10 Criteria – 10 points each, total of 100 points1. Does the project align with Council’s strategic pillars and milestones?2. Is the project mandated by any local, state, or Federal laws?3. Does the project reduce operating costs or minimize cost increases?4. Is it listed in the Asset Management Plan?5. Does the project have matching funds from other agencies?6. Does the project contribute to the Town’s overall economic vitality and bring in

additional revenue?7. Is it part of an existing Capital Improvement Plan?8. Is it listed in an existing Master Plan?9. Was the project part of a previous bond program and now needs more funding?10. Does the project involve multiple departments?

25

Proposed Bond Committee Evaluation Score

26

The project MUST be part of the recommended bond package1

2

3

The project SHOULD be part of the recommended bond package4

5

6

The project COULD be part of the recommended bond package7

8

9

The project SHOULD NOT be part of the recommended bond package10

1 = Highest Priority 10 = Lowest Priority

Ranking EquationWeighted Scale

1 = 10010 = 10

34

Committee and Staff Project Rankings Process

The Community

Bond Advisory Committee ranks each project on a

scale of 1‐10; 1 being the highest

Committee’s ranking is

averaged with staff’s ranking

Final list of recommended

projects developed

Total cost of project

compared to capacity to issue debt

If needed, project list will be trimmed

The Committee issues an

advisory report to Council that lists projects in priority order

Council determines

whether to call a bond

election and, if so, when and how much

27

Basics of Municipal Debt

28

35

Why Use Municipal Debt? To finance projects, capital assets, or make improvements to existing

assets over their useful lives with a variety of repayment options

So future beneficiaries pay their “fair share” for publicimprovements/service - debt is repaid overtime by citizens who are usingthe debt-financed asset

To finance larger projects on a more timely basis as compared to ‘pay asyou go’ funding

To help minimize the volatility of the property tax and/or user rates ascompared to ‘pay as you go’ funding

To take advantage of tax-exempt, low-cost, long-term financing

29

What are the Uses for Municipal Debt?

30

Debt Obligations

Roads

Facilities

ParksEquipment

Water & Sewer

Infrastructure improvements with a long life expectancy

36

Financial Capacity to Issue Debt

31

Financial Capacity to Issue Debt Long-term financial plan – 10-year planning horizonHigh levelAssumptions used – 4.1% growth, debt repayment schedule

Bonds committed but not issued – General Obligation (GO)bondsMidway - $13 millionVitruvian - $16 millionArts and Acquisitions - $3 million

Upcoming Issuances, not yet sold – Certificates of Obligation(CO)Midway - $25 millionAddison Grove - $3.25 million

32

37

Addison’s Tax Rate Components

Addison’s Fiscal Year 2019 total tax rate is $0.55000 per$100 of Taxable Assessed Valuation (“TAV”).

Addison’s municipal Tax Rate is divided into fourcomponents: Interest and Sinking (I&S) can only be used to pay the Town’s

annual bonded debt payments - $0.142648

Maintenance and Operations (M&O) used for operating expensesof the Town, such as compensation and benefits, parks, streets,facilities, and other on-going operating costs - $0.377435

Economic Development Fund - $0.023716

Infrastructure Investment Fund - $0.006201

33

Tax-Supported Debt – 10-Year Capacity at Current I&S Rate

Estimated 10-Year debt capacityCommitted, unused General Obligation

Bonds and Certificates of Obligation Vitruvian $10 million General Obligation (GOs) and $6 million

Certificates of Obligation (Cos) Midway Road $13 million GOs Arts & Events Land Acquisition $3 million GOs $25 million COs for Midway Road $3.25 for COs for Addison Grove

Remaining Tax-Supported Capacity Underlying assumptions:

Based on the Town’s existing Interest & Sinking tax rate of$0.142648 and Town Officials’ tax base growth projections;Debt is assumed to be sold over a 10 year period

Each additional $0.01 of debt service tax rate equalsapproximately $9.1 million of additional capacity (the inverseapplies as well)

‐=

34

$28,250,000

$63,940,000

$3,690,000

‐

=‐$32,000,000

38

Final Report to Council

35

Community Advisory Committee Report

36

January to May, 2019 Committee deliberations

June 2019 Committee report delivered to Council

August 2019 Deadline to order election, if so

directed

November 5, 2019 Bond election

Does the Committee recommend that a bond election beheld?

If so, the Community Bond Committee’s report will need to bedelivered to Council in June to meet the schedule below

39

Proposed Contents of Committee’s Report Executive Summary Process Project lists Recommended Non-recommended

Ranking process Final ranking results Proposed propositions Recommendation to Council Should a bond election be held? If so, what projects should be included?What are the recommended propositions?

37

Future Meeting Dates and Topics

38

40

Upcoming Meetings Dates and Topics

Twice a month from February to May February 11th – General Services

February 25th – Infrastructure

March 11th – Parks and IT

April 4th – Project ranking

April 11th – Financial considerations and debt capacity

April 25th – Final review of project, finalization of project list, structure of propositions

May 9th – Draft report to Council

May 23rd – Finalize report to Council

Present report to Council – June 11th

39

Election Chair, Vice Chair, and Secretary

40

41

Community Bond Advisory Committee Meeting Meeting Notes January 30, 2019

The kick-off meeting of the Community Bond Advisory Committee was held on January 30, 2019 at the Addison Conference Center in the Acacia Room.

The committee members present were: Nancy Craig, Mary Jo Cater, Susan M. Halpern, Virginia Wallace, Nancy Williams, Bob Catalani, Colleen Campbell, Eileen Resnik, Suzie Oliver, Edwin Keith, Ralph Doherty, Kent Domingue, Craig Reynolds, Taylor Bowen, Liz Oliphant, Jimmy Niemann, Bruce Arfsten, Denise Quintanilla, Lary Brown, Jason Rivera, Darren Gardner, Brooks Haley, Margie Gunther, Chris DeFrancisco, Jerry Dougan, JT McPherson, Rob Wright, Juli R Branson.

Staff members present were: Olivia Riley, Amanda Turner, Janna Tidwell, Rob Bourestom, Hamid Khaleghipour, Charles Goff, Jason Shroyer, Ashley Mitchell, Shawn Cheairs, Bill Hawley, Miesha Johnson, and Lisa Pyles.

Council Members present were: Ivan Hughes and Marlin Wileson.

Mayor Joe Chow opened the meeting by thanking the Committee for their service.

Lisa Pyles, Infrastructure and Development Services Director, presented information to the Committee about the purpose and role of the Committee, the bond program development process, the bond election schedule, the Asset Management Plan, project selection and scoring methodology, basics of municipal debt and debt capacity, the written report that will be submitted to Council, and the structure and schedule of upcoming meetings.

The Committee elected Ralph Doherty as Chair, and Bruce Arfsten as Vice-Chair. The Committee tabled the election of a Secretary to a future meeting.

During and after the presentation, the Committee discussed several questions. Staff members provided answers to those questions.

Is there a fixed dollar amount that we use to determine assets to be placed in bond consideration?

No, there is no fixed amount. The considerations are whether the project warrants being included in a bond program and the expected life of the improvement.

42

What is the timeframe of the assets moving from the green zone to the yellow zone and eventually into the red zone?

Generally, it is based on industry standards of the life expectancy of that asset. Once an asset is installed, routine maintenance inspections will be conducted that will enable staff to gauge the remaining life of the asset and whether its life expectancy can be lengthened.

Will the committee be able to view the staff’s ranking of all proposed projects? If so, when?

Yes, the committee will be shown that information. The staff will present their rankings to the committee after the committee has ranked all the projects. Also, the committee and staff will discuss the reasons for any discrepancies between the committee’s and staff’s rankings.

Will the committee be able scale a project up or down, or to recommend an alteration to the scope of a project, or are we limited to only what is presented?

To a certain extent, yes, the committee will be able to make recommendations for adjusting the scope of the project. Staff will explain the consequences of scaling the project up or down in scope. Some projects could be far enough along in the design phase that making any significant changes might not be cost effective.

Can we Skype in to the committee meetings?

Since all future meetings will be held at the Addison Service Center, IT will check what options are available at that location.

With 38 Million dollars already approved for Midway Road improvements, how much, if any, of a gap remains to be able to complete the project?

At this time, the approved amount is in line with the expected total costs associated with the project and we do not anticipate having any remaining gap. As with any project this could change as we finish design and bid the project.

What is the 4.1% growth rate for bonds based on?

Financial department personnel conducted a trend analysis and have based this assumption off that research. This assumption is reevaluated on an annual basis.

What is the maximum amount the Town could issue without affecting the tax rate? What are the consequences of issuing more debt than that?

Our limit for issuance is currently at $3.69 million dollars. The committee can recommend a higher amount for issuance but there would be an equivalent increase to the portion of the Town’s Interest and Sinking (I&S) tax rate. This would then need to be compensated for an equivalent increase in the Towns tax rate or a corresponding decrease in the portion of the tax rate that funds the Town’s Maintenance & Operations (M&O) portions of the annual budget.

43

How much would the tax rate need to increase to issue more than the $3.69 mil? How much funding can the committee recommend without affecting the AAA bond rating?

The actual increase in the tax rate and effect on the bond rating for going over the allotted $3.69 Mil is unknown at this time; further financial analysis would need to be conducted for us to arrive at a fair estimate in the event of these scenarios.

Is it important to have a date as to when the associated project costs were generated?

Yes, it is important and those dates and how the costs associated with each project will be explained as the projects are presented.

What is Jacobs Engineering Group doing in order to provide us with a fair and accurate cost projection?

Jacobs is utilizing many different avenues to arrive at a fair and accurate cost evaluation for each project. They are evaluating the entire scope of the project from beginning to end including but not limited to design, construction, and inspection. They are also using current market values; past, present and future projects from other municipalities and entities; and they are factoring in inflation and other increases in costs. This information will be explained in more detail when projects are presented to the committee.

Is the 100% design cost the final cost for the project?

Not necessarily but it should be close, we do add in a contingency amount to try to limit any unforeseen overages on our estimates. Contingencies will be explained in more detail when we present the projects to the committee.

The next Committee meeting will be on February 11, 2019 at the Addison Service Center, 16801 Westgrove Drive at 5:30 to 7:30. The meeting was adjourned at 7:25.

44


AGENDA 46 PROCESS OVERVIEW- RALPH DOHERTY 47 FACILITIES- ROB BOURESTOM 58 NOTES 68

45

Bond Advisory Committee

Agenda Session Two

February 11, 2019 5:30 – 7:30

1. Welcome and Introductions Ralph Doherty

2. Executive Perspective Wes Pierson

3. Approval of Notes from January 30, 2019 Meeting Ralph Doherty

4. Process Overview Ralph Doherty

a. February and March meetings

5. Project Ranking Process Update Lisa Pyles

6. Functional Review – General Services - Buildings Rob Bourestom

7. Functional Area Prioritization Ralph Doherty, Bruce Arfsten

a. Must Do, Should Do, Nice to Do

8. Plans and next steps Lisa Pyles

9. Closing All

46

Bond Advisory Committee2019

Bond Advisory CommitteeFebruary 11, 2019


Why are we here?

47


January 30, 2019…

• To assess and review information related to proposed futurecapital projects;

• To provide input in developing a final list of projects;

• To make a recommendation to Council concerningwhether a bond election should be called and, if so,what projects should be included; and

• To serve as community advocates for the bondprogram election, if Council decides to call anelection


Agenda/Overview

• Welcome & Introductions

• Executive Perspective

• Administration & Overview• Notes• Process updates• Priority setting

• Assess and Review• General Services

• Provide input• Analysis and grouping

• Next Steps

• Close

48


Executive Perspective


Administration and Overview• Housekeeping

• Minutes• No breaks

• Focus on important items• Attendance• Listen and learn• Ask questions

• Adopt community perspective• Subordinate the “me”• Substitute the “we”

• Work on “Big Tickets”• Effectiveness vs Efficiency

49


Focus on…

• Effective• Doing the right things

• Efficient• Doing things right

• Pilot rules in emergency• Aviate

• Navigate

• Communicate


Project update ‐ 1

• Busy three months

• Four functional area reviews and initial grouping

• 2/11 – General Services

• 2/25 – Infrastructure

• 3/11 – Parks and IT

• Process wrap up and ranking• 4/04 – Project Cost and Ranking

• 4/11 – Finance & Debt

• 4/25 – Final review and Ranking

50


Project update – 1a

• Four functional area reviews and grouping

• 2/11 – General Services• 2/25 – Infrastructure• 3/11 – Parks and IT

• Prioritization is a two pass system

• First ‐ Exclusive of cost!• Feb and Mar

• Second ‐ After cost added• Apr and May


Project update – 1a

• Four functional area reviews and grouping

• 2/11 – General Services• 2/25 – Infrastructure• 3/11 – Parks and IT

• Prioritization is a two pass system

• First ‐ Exclusive of cost!• Feb and Mar

• Second ‐ After cost added• Apr and May

51


What happens on May 4th?

• It’s the season• Potential for controversy• BAC participation

• Assumption of support

• Consensus Vs Unanimity

• Respond appropriately• Describe process

• Listen…


Determining our future

• General Services• Infrastructure• Parks• IT

52


General Services

• Facilities• Vehicles• Support Operations• Film permits

• Sustainability initiatives

Rob Bourestom


Process ‐ Grouping

Must Do

Should Do

Nice to Do• Simple classification system

• Must Do – 50%• Should Do – 30%• Nice to Do – 20%

• Communication tool• Mutual agreement• Negotiate differences

• Forces concentration• Minimizes wasted time• Leverages resources

53


Group away!

• Must do• Vital few

• Should do• Significant many

• Nice to do• Pie in the sky


Managing the Dialog

• Open communications• No passive/aggressive behavior

• Candor in all• Everyone participates• Consequences of decisions• Need help

54


Dialog Managers

• Establish relationship with counterparts

• Develop knowledge of area• Serve as BAC resource in improving our knowledge

• Assisting BAC, Staff, and community members as required


Dialog Management Team

• Infrastructure & Development

• Finance (Riley)• General Services (Bourestom)

• Parks (Tidwell)• IT (Khaleghipour)• Infrastructure (Shroyer)

• Doherty, Arfsten• Bowen, Craig• TBD’d• Domingue

• Campbell

• Brown

55


Next steps

• Project Evaluation criteria suggestions due on Friday, February 15th

• Dialog Managers work with your staff counterparts

• Check email• Updates

• Tasks

• Etc.


Next area

• Infrastructure next 2/25• Jason Shroyer. P.E.

56


57

Community Bond Advisory Facilities

Presentation

Addison Service Center – Large Break RoomFebruary 11, 2019

1

FacilitiesIntroduction

2

58

General Services

The General Service Department is the behind-the-scenes manager of the Town’s facilities, vehicles, and support services. General

ServicesGeneral Services

FacilitiesFacilities

FuelFuel

FleetFleet

FilmFilm

Conference and

Theatre Centre

Conference and

Theatre Centre

InventoryInventory

3

Purpose and Role of Town of Addison Facilities

4

59

Town of Addison Facilities

5

AP6

Role of Addison Facilities

Functions Provides work spaces for

employees, a place for residents and the community to do business and a place for visitors to experience Addison Facilities also provide

equipment storage and maintenance space

6

Asset Management

Score

Facility Condition Index

AP1AP [2]1

60

Development of Proposed Projects

7

Facility Assessment 2015Asset Management PlanOperations and Maintenance

HVAC Proposal

8

61

Current HVAC System Age of Facilities (1939-1991)

Age of Equipment HVAC equipment ranges from 1997-2017 R22 Freon obsolete units, R-410 A or Puron new standard Parts are not readily available or obsolete

American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) Determined the useful life of HVAC equipment at 12.5 years. We can get

additional years out of our equipment through regular preventative maintenance

Deferred Maintenance Issues – HAVC equipment is well past its useful life

9

HVAC Work Orders

10

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Athletic Club CelestialPump Sta

Central Fire ConferenceCentre

Finance Fire 2 Pavilion Police ServiceCenter

SurveyorPumpStation

SurveyorWater Tower

Theatre Town Hall

Work Order by Facility Site2016‐2019

2016 2017 2018 2019

RB4

62

HVAC at Service Center

11

Fire Station 1 Roof

12

63

HVAC Usage Building Facility Age Sq Ft Tonnage

Central Fire 1984 17,410 22.5

Fire #2 1982 5,658 8.5

Police & Courts 1984 27,000 48

Police Sub Stations 1995 800 2.5

Town Hall 1939 6,475 57.5

Finance 1983 6,200 24.5

Service Center 1980 31,600 80.5

Conference Centre 1991 17,000 107

Theatre 1991 32,000 172

Pump Stations 1979 ‐1987 9,565 3

Stone Cottage 1939 1,150 10

Special Event Pavilion 2003 2,500 14

Vitruvian Restroom 2005 500 6

13

556 TONSNot including AAC

Outliers Athletic Club

Conference CentreTheatre

TOTAL SQ. FT238,271

AP4AP7RB1RB2

Anticipated Outcomes with New HVAC

8% •Overall Energy Cost Savings

25% •Energy Efficiency Increase

EMS •Energy Management System Monitoring

PM Contract

•Full Service Preventative Coverage Contract

14

64

Facility Accessibility ModificationProposal

15

Background info

Department of Justice Access to Civic Life for All No Entity Exemptions Internal Self- Evaluation Facility Condition Assessment

Development of “Roadmap” 20 year plan Current Phase Proposed Projects

Funding Challenges Not part of Capital Improvement Projects Decision Packages

16

65

Project Consideration Methods

2017 Study by Kimley HornAnalysis overview 430 Total Facility Violations

Projected Costs ExplainedWhat our anticipated costs include How projects get triggered by updates

Economy of Scale PricingSequencing of Projects

17

Proposed Modifications

18

Town Hall

• Parking

• Bathrooms

• Water Fountains

Finance

• Parking

• Bathrooms

• Entryway

Service Center

• Parking

• Bathrooms

• Water Fountains

Police

• Locker Rooms

• Water fountains

Fire

• Parking Lots

• Bathrooms

Conference Centre

• Parking

• Stone Cottage Bathroom

Theatre

• Parking

• Bathroom

• Ticket Booth Accessibility

66

Facility Utilization

19

Facility Utilization ProposalProject Proposal Requests evaluation of existing Town facilities Interview Departments and analyze inter-departmental

interactions Review current staffing and future staffing placement Evaluate facility parking and storageAnalysis of facility utilizationProposal of modificationsPossibly fund suggested facility modifications through the

bond

Proposal submittal period closes February 12, 2019.

20

67

Community Bond Advisory Committee Meeting Meeting Notes February 11, 2019

Session two of the Community Bond Advisory Committee was held on February 11, 2019 at the Addison Service Center in the Large Break Room.

The committee members present were: Nancy Craig, Mary Jo Cater, Virginia Wallace, Nancy Williams, Bob Catalani, Colleen Campbell, Eileen Resnik, Suzie Oliver, Ralph Doherty, Kent Domingue, Craig Reynolds, Taylor Bowen, Liz Oliphant, Jimmy Niemann, Bruce Arfsten, Denise Quintanilla, Lary Brown, Jason Rivera, Darren Gardner, Margie Gunther, Chris DeFrancisco, Jerry Dougan, JT McPherson, Rob Wright, Juli R Branson.

Staff members present were: Wes Pierson, Olivia Riley, Amanda Turner, Rob Bourestom, Ashlee Powell, Hamid Khaleghipour, Charles Goff, Jason Shroyer, Ashley Mitchell, Shawn Cheairs, Miesha Johnson, and Lisa Pyles.

Council Members present were: Marlin Wileson.

Chair Ralph Doherty opened the meeting by discussing with the Committee their purpose and role in the bond selection process.

Wes Pierson, City Manager welcomed and thanked the committee for their time and efforts and discussed the keys to a successful bond process.

Rob Bourestom, Director of General Services and Ashlee Powell, Management Assistant for General Services presented the General Services Department projects for bond consideration: HVAC Replacement Proposal and Facility Accessibility Modification Proposal


Will we receive a list of all projects that are up for Bond Committee deliberation?

Yes, staff can compile a list and have it available at the February 11th meeting.

Rob Bourestom pointed out during his presentation that there had been a reevaluation of the Town’s facilities condition and the new Facility Condition Index (FCI) is 9.35 not the 17.7 that is in the PowerPoint presentation.

68

The score of 17.7 in the presentation was a miscalculation, the correct score is 9.35. The scale is set in such a manner that the lowest score would represent a building that is in very good condition. The scale is as follows: 0-5 is good, 5-10 is fair, 10-30 is poor and >30 is critical or failed.

The committee asked, and the staff answered, several questions regarding the specifics of the HVAC units being replaced, including:

Are there specific HVAC units that have been selected for replacement and are they energy efficient?

Yes, we have specific units that we will be replacing, and a list detailing those units has been attached to the notes. The new HVAC units to be installed will be at least one energy efficient rating above the minimum required by the building codes.

Did we consider completing any other building improvements along with the HVAC replacement?

At this time there are no other building improvements that have been taken into consideration with the replacement of the HVAC units.

Does the HVAC replacement include any accompanying services?

The proposal is for the replacement of the listed HVAC units but will include an Energy Management System for more energy efficient operations.

It was mentioned during the Americans with Disabilities (ADA) Facility Accessibility presentation that our facilities were found to have approximately 430 violations, are there any fines associated with these violations? Is there a specific deadline for our facilities to have our known violations corrected?

No, violations do not result in a fine. While there is not a specific deadline for any one item, we have a 20-year plan in place to remedy all deficiencies. If we are making continual progress on that 20-year plan, we are not in violation of our plan. However, if progress is not being made on our 20-year plan, the Department of Justice can intervene to enforce the expedition of the correction of any deficiencies that have been reported.

Regarding the Facility Utilization presentation, will we have the results of the study and be able to discuss this as part of these bond proceedings?

This study will not be completed in time to be considered for this bond issuance.

Are the projects that staff are bringing to the presentations all considered a “must do”? Would it be beneficial for staff to highlight projects that would be considered a “should do” or “nice to do”?

The projects that will be presented to the committee are, in staff’s opinion, must do projects. It is the committee’s role to question that opinion and to determine if the committee agrees with staff’s assessment. Also, the committee will be asked to rank each of the projects as to their priority. The committee’s final ranking will be presented to Council, who will decide on the final list of projects to be included in a bond program, if one is called.

69

The committee expressed a desire to have more in depth detail of the projects in future presentations. They would also like to be given more information on both the HVAC and ADA presentations that were made tonight.

The next Committee meeting will be on February 25, 2019 at the Addison Service Center, 16801 Westgrove Drive at 5:30 to 7:30. The meeting was adjourned at 7:30.

70


AGENDA 72 STREETS- JASON SHROYER 73 PROJECT REVIEW- RALPH DOHERTY 98 NOTES 110

71

Bond Advisory Committee Agenda

Session ThreeFebruary 25, 2019

5:30 – 7:30

1. Welcome Ralph Doherty

2. Approval of Notes from February 11, 2019 Meeting Ralph Doherty

3. Functional Review – Infrastructure Jason Shroyer

4. Project review discussion Committee Ralph Doherty, Bruce Arfsten

5. Closing All

72

Potential Street Bond Program

February 25, 2019

Agenda

Department Introduction

Pavement Management 101

Town of Addison Master Transportation Plan

Street Reconstruction Projects

New Street Construction

73

Street Department

Responsible for the management of the Town’s streets, traffic system, solid waste, bulk, brush pickup

167 lane miles of streets 82% concrete 18% asphalt Most streets were built in late 70’s early 80’s with a resurgence in the

early 90’s

41 miles of sidewalk Majority of sidewalks were built during private development projects

Most recent significant road construction – overlay of Belt Line Road

Pavement Management - Condition

Multiple ways to determine the condition of pavement Visual assessment Pavement Condition Index (PCI) Condition is based on number, severity, and type

of pavement distresses present Scale from 0 to 100

Rating Good Satisfactory Fair Poor Very Poor Serious Failed

Range 85 – 100 70 – 85 55 – 70 40 – 55 25 – 40 10 -25 < 10

74

Pavement Management - Condition

Multiple ways to determine the condition of pavement International Roughness Index (IRI) Scale 0 to 1000 0 is perfectly smooth >600 represents significant distress New highways are typically 40 and 60 Levels of 200 to 600 indicate increasingly

damaged or distressed roads Levels over 600 are very poor and reduce

comfortable driving speed

Pavement Management – Data Collection

Town collected data utilizing Automatic Road Analyzer (ARAN) Vehicle 2017 major arterials 2018 collectors and residential streets

Uses high resolution, high speed cameras to collect: Roadway distresses Texture, roughness and rutting data Data with GPS tags Data of adjacent infrastructure

75

Pavement Condition Map

Methodology for Selection

Proposed reconstruction projects were selected based on the following: Pavement condition index (PCI) International roughness index (IRI) Roadway classification and traffic information Work order history

Proposed new roadway construction projects were identified in the Town’s Master Transportation Plan

76

Master Transportation Plan (2016)

Plan Goals: Provide more/better options and features for active

transportation Develop a safer more efficient transportation

network Create memorable places in Addison Develop better east/west connectivity Increase route choices with new connections Support Addison economic development goals Secure a firm commitment for rail in the Cotton Belt

Master Transportation Plan

Established general sections for streets based on street type Right-of-way (ROW) width Location and dimension of median Location and dimension of sidewalks Location and dimension of parkway buffer

Provides options for the various street types

Contemplates significant modification to ROW in most cases

77

Keller Springs Road

Airport Parkway

Addison Road

Quorum Drive

Montfort Drive

Road Reconstruction Projects

Existing Condition

Project Scope

Master Transportation Plan (MTP) Elements

Year Built – 1979 Limits – Dallas North Tollway to

Addison Road Composition – Asphalt Average Traffic – 15,000 VPD

Average PCI – 35 (Very Poor) Average IRI – 343

Keller Springs Road – Existing Condition

78


Cracking Alligator cracking and rutting

Rutting Longitudinal Cracking


Cracking around manhole

Concrete curb failure

Severe alligator cracking

Pothole

79

Reconstruct existing pavement From asphalt to concrete

Upsize existing stormwater infrastructure Replace water and sewer infrastructure Add new Oncor owned street lighting Install Master Transportation Plan elements Right-of-Way acquisition Medians Sidewalks Landscaping

Replace existing traffic signal infrastructure Quorum Road

Keller Springs Road – Project Scope

Existing Conditions

Right-of-Way 60 ft to 93 ft

Median None

Sidewalk 4 ft – 5 ft Back of curb

Keller Springs Road – MTP Elements

Proposed Conditions


Median 16 ft / 5 ft

Sidewalk 6 ft 5 ft parkway buffer

80

Airport Parkway – Existing Condition

Year Built – 1978 Limits – Dallas North Tollway to

Addison Road Composition – Asphalt Average Traffic – 3,000 VPD

Average PCI – 44 (Poor) Average IRI – 338


Utility Trench Failure

Transverse cracking

Edge Failure near driveway

Shoving near intersection

81


Cracking

Transverse and Longitudinal Cracking

Transverse and Longitudinal Cracking

Transverse cracking

Airport Parkway – Project Scope


Upsize existing stormwater infrastructure East of Quorum Drive intersection

Replace water and sewer infrastructure Install Master Transportation Plan elements Right-of-Way acquisition Sidewalks Landscaping

Replace existing traffic signal infrastructure Quorum Road

82

Airport Parkway – MTP Elements

Existing Conditions

Right-of-Way 60 ft

Single lane each direction - no turn lane

No on-street parking

Sidewalk Inconsistent

through corridor

Proposed Conditions

Right-of-Way 78 ft

Add 12 ft turn lane

8 ft parallel parking

Sidewalk 8 ft sidewalk 6 ft parkway buffer with

tree wells

Quorum Drive – Existing Condition

Year Built – 1980 and 1985 Limits – Dallas North Tollway to DART

rail Right-of-Way Composition – Concrete Average Traffic – 8,400 VPD

Average PCI – 59 (Fair) Average IRI – 375

83


Corner failure and water pumping

Cracking with potholes

Large pothole

Large pothole


Curb failure and large pothole Corner failure

Alligator cracking and large pothole Ramp failure

84

Quorum Drive – Project Scope

Reconstruct existing pavement Remain as concrete

Replace water, sewer and stormwater infrastructure Replace Oncor owned street lighting Install Master Transportation Plan elements Right-of-Way acquisition Sidewalks Landscaping Trail

Replace existing traffic signal infrastructure Belt Line Road, Edwin Lewis Drive and Arapaho Road

Quorum Drive– MTP Elements

Existing Conditions


Two lanes each direction with median

Sidewalk Varies

Proposed Conditions


Maintain lane and median widths

Sidewalk – S. of f Belt Line 8 ft 6 ft parkway buffer

Sidewalk – N. of Belt Line 15 ft back of curb Tree wells

85

Montfort Drive – Existing Condition

Year Built – 1981 Limits – Belt Line Road to Town of

Addison City Limits Composition – Concrete Average Traffic – 20,000 VDP

Average PCI – 58 (Fair) Average IRI – 392


Longitudinal Cracking

Sidewalk and inlet failure Median nose failure

Cracking and delamination

86


Large pothole Lane failure

Concrete joint failureConcrete joint failure

Montfort Drive – Project Scope

Reconstruct existing pavement Remain as concrete

Upsize existing stormwater infrastructure Replace water and sewer infrastructure Replace Oncor owned street lighting Install Master Transportation Plan elements Right-of-Way acquisition Sidewalks Landscaping

87

Montfort Drive – MTP Elements

Existing Conditions


Two lanes each direction with median

Sidewalk 4 ft – 5 ft Back of curb

Proposed Conditions

Right-of-Way 88 ft

Maintain lanes and widen median 16 ft / 5 ft


Addison Road – Existing Condition

Year Built – 1983 Rehabilitation - 2015 Limits – Arapaho Road to Town

of Addison City Limits Composition – Asphalt Average Traffic – 16,000 VPD

Average PCI – 83 (Satisfactory) Average IRI – 275

88


Longitudinal Cracking Lane separation and rutting

Longitudinal Cracking Raveling


Alligator cracking Delamination

Alligator cracking near drivewayTransverse and Longitudinal Cracking

89

Addison Road – Project Scope


Replace existing stormwater infrastructure Replace water and sewer infrastructure Replace Oncor owned street lighting Install Master Transportation Plan elements Right-of-Way acquisition Medians Sidewalks Trail Landscaping

Replace existing traffic signal infrastructure Arapaho, Lindbergh, Airport, Keller Springs and Westgrove

Addison Road – MTP Elements

Existing Conditions


Two lanes each direction - no median

Sidewalk Varies

Proposed Conditions

Right-of-Way 90 ft

Maintain lanes and add median 16 ft / 5 ft


Trail 10 ft 6 ft parkway buffer

90

New Road Construction Projects

Location Description

Beltway Drive to Gillis

Road

Landmark Boulevard to

DNT

N. BeltwoodParkway to

Inwood Road

Beltway Drive to

Inwood Road

Artist Way to Addison

Road

Beltway Drive to Arapaho

Road

Beltway Drive to Gillis Road - Map

91

Beltway Drive to Gillis Road – Description

Extend Beltway Drive south to Gillis Road/Maxim Drive Connects with the Farmers Branch road network

Likely require the demolition of several buildings and/or parking lots Opens a new north/south connection to Spring Valley Allows for more active transportation opportunities between Addison and

Farmers Branch Supports Inwood Road Special Area Study findings

Beltway Drive to Arapaho Road - Map

92

Beltway Drive to Arapaho Road - Description

Extend Beltway Drive north to Arapaho Road Create new connection to Arapaho between Addison Road and Midway Would require negotiation with Dallas Water Utilities Property houses a large ground storage tank for water Reluctance by Dallas Water Utilities to allow ancillary uses of their

property

Landmark Blvd to DNT - Map

93

Landmark Blvd to DNT - Description

Landmark does not current connect with Dallas North Tollway Requires vehicle to cut through private parking lot

Provides additional connection point to the Tollway Portion of this extension is already built Cawley Partners Development

N. Beltwood Parkway to Inwood Road - Map

94

N. Beltwood Parkway to Inwood Road - Description

Extend Beltwood Parkway east to connect with Inwood Road Provide an additional east/west connection between Spring Valley Road

and Belt Line Road Most likely require the demolition of several buildings and/or parking lots Supports the grid type street system to help distribute traffic in the area

Beltway Drive to Inwood Road - Map

95

Beltway Drive to Inwood Road - Description

Extend Beltway Drive east to Inwood Road Most likely require the demolition of several buildings and/or parking lots Supports the grid type street system to help distribute traffic in the area Supports Inwood Road Special Area Study findings

Artist Way to Addison Road - Map

96

Artist Way to Addison Road - Description

Extend Artist Way west to connect with Addison Road Provides and additional east/west connection between Morris Avenue and

Airport Parkway Town already owns the property where the street would be placed Supports traffic dispersion within the Addison Circle area Supports findings of Addison Circle Special Area Study

Wrap Up

Road Reconstruction Projects

New Street Construction Projects

Keller Springs Road

Airport Parkway

Addison Road

Quorum Drive

Montfort Drive

Beltway Drive to Gillis

Road

Landmark Boulevard to

DNT

N. BeltwoodParkway to

Inwood Road

Beltway Drive to

Inwood Road

Artist Way to Addison

Road

Beltway Drive to Arapaho

Road

97


Bond Advisory CommitteeFebruary 25, 2019


Quick review ‐Why are we here?

98


January 30, 2019…

• To assess and review information related to proposed futurecapital projects;

• To provide input in developing a final list of projects;

• To make a recommendation to Council concerningwhether a bond election should be called and, if so,what projects should be included; and

• To serve as community advocates for the bondprogram election, if Council decides to call anelection


Do we need a bond election and, if so, forwhat projects and in what priority sequence?

Assess & Review

Provide Input

Make Recommendations

Serve as Advocates

99


Agenda/Overview

• Welcome• Administration

• Notes & Approval

• Overview• Projects• Priorities

• Assess and Review• Infrastructure

• Provide input• Analysis & grouping

• Next Steps• Close


Proposed projects (18)• HVAC Replacements – Replacement of 15‐18 year units with new,

more energy efficient units

• ADA Structural Improvements – Such as, parking area access ramps, restroom reconfigurations, doorway widenings

• Roof Replacements – Replacement of several Town facility roofs due to age and failed condition

• Keller Springs Road – Reconstruction of roadway from Addison Road to Dallas North Tollway and associated utility (water, sewer, stormwater) and Master Transportation Plan elements

• Airport Parkway – Reconstruction of roadway from Addison Road to Dallas North Tollway and associated utility (water, sewer, stormwater) replacements and Master Transportation Plan elements

• Quorum Road ‐ Reconstruction of roadway from Airport Parkway to Dallas North Tollway and associated utility (water, sewer, stormwater) replacements and Master Transportation Plan elements

• Montfort Road – Reconstruction of roadway from Belt Line Road to Palladium Drive and associated utility (water, sewer, stormwater) replacements and Master Transportation Plan elements

• Addison Road ‐ Reconstruction of roadway from Arapaho Road to the north city limits and associated utility (water, sewer, stormwater) replacements and Master Transportation Plan elements

• Landmark Boulevard Extension to DNT – From current termination east of Inwood Road to Dallas North Tollway frontage road

• North Beltwood Parkway to Inwood Road Extension – From current termination of North Beltwood east to Inwood Road

• Artist Way to Addison Road Extension – New east/west connection from Addison Circle area to Addison Road

• Beltway Drive to Gillis Road Extension – Extension of Beltway South to connect to Gillis Road/Maxim Drive in Farmers Branch

• Beltway Drive to Arapaho Road – Extension of Beltway Drive from current north terminus at Belt Line Road to Arapaho Road

• Beltway Drive to Inwood Road – New east/west connection from Beltway Drive to Inwood Road

• Athletic Club / Pool Improvements ‐ Such as, locker room, lobby, gym, and pool improvements

• Quorum Art Walk – Creation of additional park and parklet spaces, additional lighting

• Trail Expansion / Wayfinding – Additional trails and wayfinding signage

• Smart City Technology Plan – Expansion of License Plate Recognition program, exploration and implementation of emerging technologies, such as smart signals, smart street lighting, emergency awareness services

100


Proposed projects (Grouped)• General Services (4/22%)

• HVAC Replacements – Replacement of 15‐18 year units with new, more energy efficient units

• Roof Replacements – Replacement of several Town facility roofs due to age and failed condition

• ADA Structural Improvements – Such as, parking area access ramps, restroom reconfigurations, doorway widenings

• Athletic Club / Pool Improvements ‐ Such as, locker room, lobby, gym, and pool improvements

• Infrastructure (Roads – 11/61%))• Keller Springs Road – Reconstruction of roadway from Addison Road to

Dallas North Tollway and associated utility (water, sewer, stormwater) and Master Transportation Plan elements



• Montfort Road – Reconstruction of roadway from Belt Line Road to Paladium Drive and associated utility (water, sewer, stormwater) replacements and Master Transportation Plan elements

• Infrastructure (Roads cont’d)) • Addison Road ‐ Reconstruction of roadway from Arapaho Road to the north

city limits and associated utility (water, sewer, stormwater) replacements and Master Transportation Plan elements







• Parks & IT (3/17%)• Quorum Art Walk – Creation of additional park and parklet spaces,

additional lighting

• Trail Expansion / Wayfinding – Additional trails and wayfinding signage• Smart City Technology Plan – Expansion of License Plate Recognition

program, exploration and implementation of emerging technologies, such as smart signals, smart street lighting, emergency awareness service


Jason Shroyer, P.E.

• UTSA – BS CE• R. H. Shackleford – 7/10‐7/13

• Project Mgr. Addison, Beltline Rd

• Addison – 7/13 – Current• Assistant Director of Infrastructure and Engineering Services

• Manages the city’s…• Trash and recycling services• Water, sewer, and stormwater systems

• Public streets, signs and signals, street markings.

101


Questions/comments for Jason?


Committee must make choices

102


In what relative sequence…• Infrastructure (Roads – 11/61%))

• Keller Springs Road – Reconstruction of roadway from Addison Road to Dallas North Tollway and associated utility (water, sewer, stormwater) and Master Transportation Plan elements



• Montfort Road – Reconstruction of roadway from Belt Line Road to Paladium Drive and associated utility (water, sewer, stormwater) replacements and Master Transportation Plan elements

• Addison Road ‐ Reconstruction of roadway from Arapaho Road to the north city limits and associated utility (water, sewer, stormwater) replacements and Master Transportation Plan elements








Lots of methods to determine

• “Scientific”/empirical• Periodic Table of Product Prioritization

• The Kano Model• Quality Function Deployment• Story Mapping• MoSCoW• Prune the Product Tree• Speed Boat• Opportunity Scoring

• Financial Analysis• Net Present Value• Internal Rate of Return• Discounted Payback Period• Ian McAllister’s Framework• Impact of goal• Value Vs Risk• Value Vs Cost• Scorec• Theme Screening• Classification ranking• Systemico• Etc., etc., etc.

103


Period Table of Product Prioritization


The Kano model

104


Quality Function Deployment


Opportunity scoring

105


Too complex! Spurious accuracy…• Story Mapping

• MoSCoW

• Prune the Product Tree

• Speed Boat

• Financial Analysis• Net Present Value• Internal Rate of Return• Discounted Payback Period• Ian McAllister’s Framework• Impact of goal• Value Vs Risk• Value Vs Cost• Scorecard• Theme Screening• Classification ranking• Systemico• Etc., etc., etc.


KISS method (Keep it simple stupid)

106


Critical few Vs Significant many

• Identify “Critical” Vs “Significant” projects• Divide into two groups• Most Vs Least “Value to Citizens” within each group

• Merge (1‐18)

• “Make sense?” reality test – Top to bottom

• Save for April discussions


The rules…

• No talking…until OK• Own work ‐ Handout• Personal definition of value to citizens

• Prepared to defend your choice• You will vote, post, and discuss• You may change vote if persuaded

107


In what relative sequence…• Infrastructure (Roads – 11/61%)

1. Keller Springs Road – Reconstruction of roadway from Addison Road to Dallas North Tollway and associated utility (water, sewer, stormwater) and Master Transportation Plan elements

2. Airport Parkway – Reconstruction of roadway from Addison Road to Dallas North Tollway and associated utility (water, sewer, stormwater) replacements and Master Transportation Plan elements

3. Quorum Road ‐ Reconstruction of roadway from Airport Parkway to Dallas North Tollway and associated utility (water, sewer, stormwater) replacements and Master Transportation Plan elements

4. Montfort Road – Reconstruction of roadway from Belt Line Road to Paladium Drive and associated utility (water, sewer, stormwater) replacements and Master Transportation Plan elements

5. Addison Road ‐ Reconstruction of roadway from Arapaho Road to the north city limits and associated utility (water, sewer, stormwater) replacements and Master Transportation Plan elements

6. Landmark Boulevard Extension to DNT – From current termination east of Inwood Road to Dallas North Tollway frontage road

7. North Beltwood Parkway to Inwood Road Extension – From current termination of North Beltwood east to Inwood Road

8. Artist Way to Addison Road Extension – New east/west connection from Addison Circle area to Addison Road

9. Beltway Drive to Gillis Road Extension – Extension of Beltway South to connect to Gillis Road/Maxim Drive in Farmers Branch

10. Beltway Drive to Arapaho Road – Extension of Beltway Drive from current north terminus at Belt Line Road to Arapaho Road

11. Beltway Drive to Inwood Road – New east/west connection from Beltway Drive to Inwood Road

Project No. Critical Few Significant Many

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11


Get ready…

108


Next areas – March 11, 2019

Janna TidwellHamid KhaleghipourRob Bourestom


109

Community Bond Advisory Committee Meeting Meeting Notes February 25, 2019

The third meeting of the Community Bond Advisory Committee was held on February 25, 2019 at the Addison Treehouse Event Room.

The committee members present: Bruce Arfsten, Juli Branson, Lary Brown, Colleen Campbell, Robert Catalani, Mary Jo Cater, Chris DeFrancisco, Ralph Doherty, Kent Domingue, Jerry Dougan, Margie Gunther, Susan Halpern, Edwin Keith, JT McPherson, Jimmy Niemann, Liz Oliphant, Denise Quintanilla, Eileen Resnik, Craig Reynolds, Jason Rivera, Virginia Wallace, and Nancy Williams.

Staff members present: Olivia Riley, Amanda Turner, Rob Bourestom, Hamid Khaleghipour, Charles Goff, Jason Shroyer, Ashley Mitchell, Shawn Cheairs, Janna Tidwell, Wilson Kakembo, Chad Hancock, and Lisa Pyles.

Council Members present: Marlin Wileson and Ivan Hughes.

Chair Ralph Doherty opened the meeting by discussing with the Committee their purpose and role in the bond selection process.

Jason Shroyer, Assistant Director of Infrastructure Services and Engineering presented the Infrastructure Services Department projects for bond consideration: Road Reconstruction Projects (Keller Springs Road, Airport Parkway, Addison Road, Quorum Drive, Montfort Drive) and New Road Construction Projects (Beltway Drive to Gillis Road, Landmark Boulevard to Dallas North Tollway, North Beltwood Parkway to Inwood Road, Beltway Drive to Inwood Road, Artist Way to Addison Road, Beltway Drive to Arapaho Road)


Is there Right of Way (ROW) available to complete the projects as outlined?

The ROW is available for the road construction but if all the Master Transportation Plan elements are to be added to the project we will need to purchase additional ROW.

What will the inconvenience be to drivers and the surrounding residents during the potential reconstruction of Keller Springs Road?

110

There will be an impact to traffic flow during the reconstruction of Keller Springs Road as well as any other street that is reconstructed. Traffic flow is taken into consideration during the design phase of every project and the potential impact to motorists and residents will be minimized as much as practicable to complete the work.

Do we need to replace all water, wastewater and stormwater piping infrastructure every time we reconstruct a street?

While replacing all infrastructure is not required when reconstructing a street, the best practice is to replace the utilities in areas where the utilities might be replaced within the next few years. This prevents having to remove portions of the newly reconstructed street to replace infrastructure underneath it. Doing both utility replacement and roadway reconstruction at the same time, will save money in the long run as well as limiting the number of times traffic flow would be interrupted. The projects that staff has presented include the replacement of the utilities at the time the roadway is reconstructed.

The presentation shows some of the sidewalks will be only six feet wide, is that wide enough to satisfy ADA requirements?

Yes, a six-foot sidewalk would meet the ADA minimum requirement of 5 feet.

What effect if any will the DART Cotton Belt Line have on traffic on Keller Springs Road?

We do not believe that the new DART rail station will have an impact on the traffic of Keller Springs Road.

Would there be improvements to other aspects of the roadway, such as crosswalks, concurrent with the road reconstruction?

Yes, we would make any other necessary improvements in accordance with ADA standards, the Master Transportation Plan, and other Addison standards.

Are the designed medians for safety or aesthetic purposes?

The medians are designed for both safety and visual aesthetics. A median will divide opposing lanes of traffic therefore reducing the likelihood of head on collisions from driving and can be designed to match the desired look that will accomplish meeting the standard of the Addison Brand.

Are there already existing utility easements that the Town can utilize for utility placement?

In some cases, yes, there will be existing easements, but there are a variety of different easements serving different purposes. We must ensure that we are using the proper easements for our intended purposes.

Will the costs be broken down to show each project with and without a median? Can you provide a breakdown of costs for the associated reconstruction projects?

We will provide you with the estimates we have during the April 4th meeting, when finances will be discussed. Please be aware that the cost of the median itself is very small in comparison to the remainder of the project.

111

Why is there a plan to put parallel parking along Airport Parkway?

So as to have Airport Parkway match the Addison Circle area.

If Oncor owns the associated street lighting, will they pay for the new lights or to replace old lights?

We will coordinate with Oncor on the installation of all lighting on any street project we undertake.

How will Montfort Drive transition to Dallas since Addison does not own all the street heading south?

We will coordinate with the City of Dallas to discover what their future plans are. If there are upcoming plans, we will discuss our ability to accomplish our reconstruction plans together.

Does the Montfort project consider the development that is currently planned for the southeast corner of Village on the Parkway?

At this point in our design process it does not. However, if the development is approved and moves forward the developer would be responsible for their portion of the reconstruction effort which would reduce the overall funding impact for the Town’s project.

Where does the volume per day measurement get recorded when collecting traffic count data? How often are traffic counts collected?

We take data from various points along each street to provide a more accurate measure of traffic volume on the entirety of the roadway. We conduct traffic counts every two years generally in the fall after school has started. Our last traffic count was completed in the fall of 2018 and the full report can be found on our website.

https://addisontexas.net/infrastructure/page/streets-traffic-services

A median would inherently remove some accessibility to make turns along a street, how would this limited accessibility affect traffic flow both onto and off Addison Road from the Addison Circle development? How will this limited accessibility affect the increase in traffic flow that corresponds to special events that take place at Addison Circle Park?

The addition of medians, particularly on Addison Road will certainly impact the traffic flow into/out of the park during Special Events. We would expect that impact will be minimal given that the median cuts will have to be lined up with intersections. The businesses along the corridor will see the largest impacts to their current accessibility because of the medians.

Are there currently any plans to underground any of the utilities for the stated projects like what was done on Beltline Rd? Can a utility company decide to underground their utilities at a later date?

No there are no plans to underground any of the utilities by the Town currently. If a utility company wants to underground their utilities, they can do so whenever they like. However, they are required to restore any disturbed material to the same Addison Standards the material was in prior to their work.

What is the proposed timeline for these projects? How will the projects affect the bond funding?

112

Each project will have a varying timeline that would depend on the amount of area the project is to encompass as well as the individual projects scope of work. Keller Springs Road would take approximately 24 months to complete. We would stagger the projects in such a manner as to prevent neighboring north/south or east/west projects from taking place at the same time and thereby reducing traffic flow issues. This will aid in the bond funding issuance as we would only issue the funds needed to complete the project that is currently active.

Can the committee be provided with the current maintenance costs on the proposed reconstruction projects?

Yes, this information can be provided. However, please note that maintenance costs will not necessarily be indicative of the need to reconstruct a road. Very little funding will be expended on a road that has failed as it no longer cost efficient to do so. We will have that information to you as soon as it is compiled.

What roads would be done first? Is the DART rail being taken into consideration? Which two would the Town recommend completing first?

While the DART rail and other railroad crossings will always be considered when developing a new project, more consideration is given to the overall condition of the road. We will utilize the Pavement Condition Index and the International Roughness Index to determine the quality level of each street in town. Following the condition of the road we will consider the level of use of the road and the amount of work that has been done on the road recently (pothole repair, crack sealing, etc.). The two roads that staff recommends as the highest priority are Keller Springs Road and Quorum Drive.

After the presentation, the Chair asked the committee the following question.

What roads does the committee feel are more important to be completed first?

Some members of the committee expressed that the new construction of the roads for Inwood connectors from Beltway and Beltwood would be vital to the redevelopment of the Inwood Road area.

The next Committee meeting will be on March 11, 2019 at the Addison Tree House Event Room, 14681 Midway Road, Suite 200 from 5:30 to 8:30. Dinner will be served. The meeting was adjourned at 7:30.

113

MEETING MARCH 11, 2019 114

AGENDA 115 FACILITIES- ROB BOURESTOM 116 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY- HAMID KHALEGHIPOUR 133 PARKS AND RECREATION- JANNA TIDWELL 149 SPECIAL AREA STUDY LAND ACQUISITION- CHARLES GOFF 168 NOTES 174

114


Agenda March 11, 2019

5:30 – 8:30


2. Approval of Notes from February 25, 2019 Meeting Ralph Doherty

3. Functional Review

a. General Services – Rob Bourestom b. IT – Hamid Khaleghipour c. Parks – Janna Tidwell d. Land Acquisition – Charles Goff

4. Project review discussion Committee Ralph Doherty, Bruce Arfsten 5. Next meeting – April 4, 2019, 5:30 to 7:50 Addison Tree House

a. Project ranking and cost estimates

6. Closing All

115

Community Bond Advisory Facilities:

Roof Replacement and Air Filtration in Police Gun Range

Addison TreeHouseMarch 11, 2019

1

Roof Replacement Proposal

2

116

Background InformationCurrent Condition of Facility Roofs Some roofs original to facilities Minor repairs and replacements Deferred maintenance impact to useful life New roofs on Conference Centre and parts of

the Theatre

Impact of Roof Replacement Stronger and more durable materials available Increased energy efficiency Decreased repair costs (to roofs and interior) Long-term savings 40+ year useful life with maintenance

3

Consequence of Deferred Maintenance

4

The repair of one issue can lead to the causation of a new issue that impacts useful life of a roof.

117

Proposed Replacement Materials

5

AP [3]4

Built Up Roof (BUR)-Coal Tar and White Gravel

2 ply, rubberized coal tarWhite materialWhite gravel Reflective for energy

savingsWarranty-20 year

labor and material

6

118

Current Facility Roofing

7

Existing Conditions-Central Fire

8

119

Central FireRoof Age: 15 years Frequent patchingDamage to interior

due to roof leaksMold has been an

issue in the pastWill do exterior

waterproofing as wellReplace roof with

BUR Coal-Tar with White Gravel

9

Existing Conditions-Fire 2

10

Roof membrane weak and delaminated

Ponding‐standing water

Core samples are taken to determine roof condition

120

Fire Station 2

Roof Age: Over 15 years

Frequent patching Damage to interior

due to roof leaksMold remediation in

and around the HVACWill do exterior

waterproofing as well Replace roof with


11

Existing Conditions-Police Department

Ponding

Standing water

Holes in flashing membrane

121

Police Department

Roof Age: 25+ years

Ongoing repairsDamage to interior

walls, wood and ceiling due to roof leaksExterior

waterproofingReplace roof with


13

Existing Conditions-Service Center A

14

Extensive ponding

Holes and cracks around penetrations

Ridges on damaged flashing membrane

122

Service Center-ARoof Age: 25+

years Lots of penetrationsSevere flashing

damageMembrane damageWill do exterior



15

Existing Conditions-Service Center B

16

Failed sealant joints

Failed sealant and flashing

Roof core weak and delaminated

123

Service Center-B

Roof Age: 15+ years

Ongoing repairs Flashing damageDamage to interior Will do exterior



17

Existing Conditions-Athletic Club A

18

Failed sealant in building joints

Holes and cracks in membrane

Sealant at coping joints failed

124

Athletic Club-A

Roof Age: 30+ years

Ongoing repairsBUR and ShinglesDamage to interior Will do exterior



19

Existing Conditions-Service Center B

20

Severe ponding (all of the dark areas)

Gaps in perimeter edge flashing

125

Athletic Club-B

Roof Age: 15 years

Roof blistersPonding and many

penetrations Will do exterior



21

Existing Conditions-Pavilion

22

Open flashing

Blistered Membrane

Wrinkles and cracks

Severe ponding

Membrane cracks and wrinkles

126

Addison Circle Park Pavilion

Roof Age: 16 years

Delaminated roof membraneSignificant damage

to interior spacesWood decking

replacementReplace roof with


23

Existing Conditions-Theatre Centre Lobby

24

Rusted panels

Open seams

Failed sealant around perimeter

127

Theatre Centre Lobby

Roof Age: 26 years

Metal standing seam roof Interior damage Significant, consistent

leaks Replace roof with

metal roof to keep the look of the buildingMetal roofs will have a

50 year useful life with proper maintenance

25

Existing Conditions-Theatre Centre Main Space

26

Ponding and failed coating

Coating failing at penetrations and extensive roof blistering

128

Theatre Centre Main Space

Roof Age: Restored 9 years ago Restored with

Polyurethane Foam (PUF), 5 year life Significant, consistent

leaks, ponding and blistering 2 roofs causing

standing water between roofs Replace roof with


27

Existing Conditions-Surveyor Pump Station

28

Failed sealant, waterproofing needed

Blistering on roof

129

Theatre Centre Main Space

Roof Age: 12+ yearsBlistering of

membranePenetrations and

flashing need to be replacedWindows and wall

joints need to be waterproofedReplace roof with


29

Police Gun RangeAir Filtration System

30

130

Background

Current Age Original 35 years old (1984)

Type of Range Small Indoor Contained Range 6 Lanes 25 Yard

31

Current HVAC

Current System 5 Ton Split System Shared System withExercise Area

Current Issues No Air Filtration or Remediation Environmental Issues Work Safety Issues Health Hazards

32

131

Proposed Design of System and Build Separate Operating Systems

Energy Efficient Runs only when in use

HEPA Filtration for Lead and Other Toxins

Radial Air Diffusers Push Air Down Range

Complaint System National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health

(NIOSH) Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)

33

132

Community Bond AdvisoryInformation Technology

Presentation

TreehouseMarch 11, 2019

1

Agenda• Introduction:• Smart City Concept/Technologies

• Proposed Bond Projects:• Expansion of License Plate Recognition (LPR) Network• Advanced Traffic Management System (ATMS)

• Town‐Wide Mesh Wireless Network

• Automated Meter Reading System (AMRS)

• Drone Technology

2

133

Introduction

3

Executive Director of Business Performance and Innovation

• Hamid Khaleghipour

• Bachelor’s Degree in Computer Science minor in Mathematics – 1984

• System Manager/Programmer Analyst – York International – 1984 thru 1990

• City of Enid – IT Manager – 1990 thru 1997

• Town of Addison – IT Director – 1997 thru 2016

• Town of Addison – Executive Director of Business Performance and Innovation 2016 thru present

4

134

Executive Director of Business Performance and Innovation’s Role

5

• Manage and support the Town’s Metropolitan Area Network, including Public Safety.

• Provide evaluation, recommendation, and implementation of emerging technology.

• Translate the organization’s vision and goals into a comprehensive strategic technological plan that aligns the actions and tasks of all departments with the Town’s goals.

• Be a resource for staff in the exploration of new civic technologies to enhance citizen satisfaction and engagement, increase government efficiency and transparency, provide town staff with the tools they need to be innovative thinkers and service providers, and promote the Town’s innovation economy.

• Develop policies and guidelines for all aspects of the Town’s network and telecommunication operation and use.

Smart City Concept/Technologies

6

135

Smart City Concept Definition

7

The Smart City concept integrates information and communication technology, and various physical devices connected to the network of “”Internet of Things”” (IoT) to optimize the efficiency of city operations and services and connect to citizens. (Wikipedia)

What makes Addison a Smarter Town? We believe it is our data and our vision! By leveraging the multiple data sources that we have today and integrating additional datasets, we can design modern programs and services that make Addison a Smarter Town. Through sensors, connectivity, and analytics we can begin our transformation to achieve our goals around energy efficiency, air quality, intelligent transportation, public safety, public health, and other programs focused on improving quality of life for our citizens. In addition, we believe the Smart City concept allows town officials to interact directly with both the community and town staff and to monitor what is happening in the town and how the town is evolving.

8

136

Proposed Bond Projects

9

Expansion of License Plate Recognition Network(LPR)

Bond Project (#1)

10

137

Expansion of License Plate Recognition Network (LPR)Bond Project (#1)

• Project Intent :To maximize the use of cutting edge technology to improve Addison’s Public Safety mission to enhance its crime prevention and mitigation strategies.

• How does LPR work?Fixed License Plate Recognition (LPR) cameras take photos of license plates capturing date, time and GPS coordinates of where the photo was taken‐ just like any smartphone camera – then check the image against Federal Agencies databases National Crime Information Center (NCIC) and local agencies flagged vehicles (knows criminals etc.).

Each license plate image captured, along with the data for that image (date, time,

location) is stored in vendor’s datacenter as an LPR record that can be searched only bythe police department for legitimate law enforcement purposes.

Addison owns the LPR data it generates and Addison PD can decide whether they want to share that data with other agencies.

11

Expansion of License Plate Recognition Network (LPR)Bond Project (#1)

• Current Status:• Installed 20 License Plate Readers at eight (8) intersections and neighborhood entrances. (Q1&Q2 FY18‐19)• Oaks North Dr. and Belt Line Rd.• Belt Line Rd. and Winnwood Rd.• Celestial Rd. and Montfort Dr.• Proton Dr. and Midway Rd.• Beltway Dr. and Marsh Ln.• Surveyor Blvd and Belt Line Rd.• Beltway Dr. and Midway Rd.• Palladium Dr. and Montfort Dr.

• Installed seven (7) Optical cameras at two (2) jogging, hiking, and biking trails. (Q1&Q2 FY 18‐19)• White Rock Creek – 2 cameras – One at each entrance• Easement Park – 5 cameras – Fire station2, Dog park, Bush elementary school, 2 cameras at Marsh Ln. entrance

• Proof of concept (Q3&Q4 FY 18‐19)• Collect data for a minimum of 6‐9 months .• Dra an op cal camera data collec on policy to address requirements and responsibili es with respect to the following:

• Installation and operation of the system• Use of informa on obtained • Integra ng 3rd party system (e.g. HOAs, banks, and hotels security systems, etc.) onto the proposed town’s system • Custody, control, share and access to records created through aforemen oned systems.

• Share collected data, including 10‐year cost of ownership and lessons learned with the Council to receive direction from Council on whether to scale/expand the Pilot Project to a town‐wide system with a multi‐phased implementation strategy.

12

138

Current LPR/Optical Cameras Network

13

Expansion of License Plate Recognition Network Town‐Wide (LPR)Bond Project (#1)

• Proposed LPR Network Expansion:• Install LPR cameras at the gate of entries to the town, other intersections, and the point of entries to the neighborhoods

• Install optical cameras along two (2) jogging/biking trails

• White Rock Creek

• Easement Park

• Explore integration of the 3rd party camera systems (e.g. HOAs banks, and hotels security systems, etc.) onto the proposed town’s system

14

139

Proposed LPR/Optical Cameras Network Expansion

15

Advanced Traffic Management System(ATMS)

Bond Project (#2)

16

140

Advanced Traffic Management System (ATMS)Bond Project (#2)

• Project Intent :To replace the existing system that has a life expectancy of about 10 years but it

has been in operation for approximately 12 years. Due to the equipment age,

much of the system equipment is no longer available for purchase or supported by

Motorola. To meet the future bandwidth needs of the ATMS, and to provide

a reliable, scalable, and redundant communication system, a core

communication system upgrade/replacement is necessary.• Current Status:

The Town of Addison currently utilizes a broadband wireless communication system to support the Town’s Advanced Traffic Management System (ATMS). The wireless communication system consists of Motorola unlicensed point‐to‐point and point‐to‐multipoint technologies designed around a hub and access point architecture.

17

Current Advanced Traffic Management Network Design

18

141

Proposed Advanced Traffic Management System (ATMS) Upgrade/ReplacementBond Project (#2)

• Proposed Advanced Traffic Management System upgrade/replacementProposed system will upgrade/replace the core infrastructure, the cellular units, and traffic signal preemption unites.

Advantages:• On demand wireless video streaming.• Integrated battery backup for power fail reporting.• Allows for remote monitoring of intersections.• Minimizes communication outages at the intersections.• Maximizes the efficient movement of vehicles and pedestrians throughout the Town.• Offers new preemption system that allows for the preemption to take effect when the

emergency vehicle is within the set radius for that intersection allowing for traffic clear in front of the first responders and it drastically cut down critical emergency responsetimes.

• Preemption can work through tunnels, overpasses, and between buildings.• Fire Department can monitor travel times and check effectiveness of system for fine

tuning.

19

Proposed Advanced Traffic Management Network DesignBond Project (#2)

20

142

Town-Wide Mesh Wireless NetworkBond Project (#3)

21

Town‐Wide Mesh Wireless NetworkBond Project (#3)

• Project Intent :To reduce operating cost, increase speed and improve capabilities, and establish a common

data transport layer (Backbone layer) to provide the synergy between the existing systems

that are due to be replaced (e.g. Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system,

Fuel Farm, Wireless Camera at Addison Circle Park) and/or they are in the queue to be

implemented (e.g. Cloud Business Continuity & Disaster Recovery System , Police Record

Management System (RMS)).

• Current Status:Currently Town is leasing fiber lines from Spectrum in order to provide both network

connectivity and telecommunication services to the town’s buildings/employees. Current

network layout is a “Star Topology” connecting the Town’s buildings through the Spectrum’s

fiber network.

22

143

Current Town’s Network Design

23

Town‐Wide Mesh Wireless NetworkBond Project (#3)

Proposed Mesh Wireless Network:Mesh wireless network provides a future‐proof solution with enough capacity to handle the most demanding applications that run over the network today, with ample bandwidth for future expansion. Mesh wireless network technologies meet the requirements of video imaging systems for public safety purposes. In addition to high capacity backhaul for video applications, point‐to‐point gigabit mesh wireless solutions are an ideal way for Addison to enable robust, high‐speed mobile connectivity, even in emergency situations in which communications are required on a moment notice, with all the performance benefits of fiber, while still yielding a significant cost savings compared to metro fiber cabling/leasing.

24

144

Proposed Town‐Wide Mesh Wireless NetworkBond Project (#3)

25

Automated Meter Reading System(AMRS)

Bond Project (#4)

26

145

Automated Meter Reading System (AMRS)Bond Project (#4)

• Project Intent :To install a Fixed Network Advanced Metering Infrastructure

System that will work with all major water meters, with an

expected reading accuracy of 98% or more for all meters in the

system.

• Current Status:Current system is a walk‐by & touch system that requires Utility

Billing staff to use a prob to touch each water meter lid sensor to

capture readings from each water meter through the entire Town.

27

Automated Meter Reading System (AMRS)Bond Project (#4)

Proposed AMRS: Proposed system will use wireless technology to automatically collect consumption, diagnostic and status data from water meters and transfer the data to a central database for billing, troubleshooting (leak detection) and analysis. This system saves the Town the expense of periodic trips to each physical location to read a meter and enable the staff to refocus their energies to other areas of operation.

Another benefit is billing will be based on real‐time consumption. This real‐time data, coupled with analysis, can help both the Town and customers better control water consumption (usage).

28

146

Drone TechnologyBond Project (#5)

29

Drone TechnologyBond Project (#5)

• Project Intent :To implement a comprehensive solution that empowers the Town's public safety division to use and manage drone technology and build and scale its drone program to complement the existing Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) system at North Texas Emergency Communication Center (NTECC).

The real capabilities of drones come from the payload that we decide to attach to the drones (e.g. Thermal Imaging, High resolution cameras for search and rescue, crash reconstruction tool, 3D mapping tool, scene overwatch tool, and container for carrying and remotely dropping equipment in emergency situations such as CO2activated life preservers, IFA (Individual First Aid) kits, or even radios.

30

147

Drone Technology Application

31

Reflection

Innovation distinguishes between a leader and a follower.

Steve Jobs

32

148

Parks and Recreation Presentation Presentation

Bond Committee Presentation • March 2019

Parks & RecreationMission and Vision Statement

MISSIONTo preserve and enhance Addison’s exceptional quality of life and work‐life environment by maximizing the recreational, social, economic and environmental benefits of the community’s award winning parks, trails, green spaces and recreation facilities.

VISIONWe envision an active, vibrant, interconnected urban hub with unique public/private recreation and open spaces that promote Addison’s heritage, art, greenspace, economic vitality and neighborhood cohesiveness.

149

2018 Maintenance Contracts

162018 Parkland Inventory

15 Public Parks5 Greenbelts

2 Joint‐Use Facilities65 Acres of Beautification

Areas

2019 Staff

21 Full‐Time Employees

FY 2019 Budget$3,800,000

Parks

Park Inventory and Classification

Classification# of Sites Total

Acreage Examples

Public Parks 15 61.4Addison Circle Park, Celestial Park, BeckertPark, Athletic Club,

Greenbelts 5 40.0 Arapaho Park, White Rock Trail, Redding Trail and Dog Park

SchoolRecreation Facilities

2 5.9 George Bush Elementary Park, Les Lacs Dog Park

Recreation Center

1 6.10 Addison Athletic Club

Planned Parks 1 TBD Addison Grove Development

TOTALS 113.4*

* Parks and Recreation maintains approximately 65 additional acres of beautification areas.

150

2018 Total Membership

4,025

2018 Facility Use

126,000 Visits60 Programs Offered

690 Library Cards Issued

2018 Staff

9 Full‐Time7 Park Time16 Seasonal

FY 2019 Budget$1,900,000

Recreation

2018 Demographics

Ages 0‐13 10%Ages 13‐49 57%Ages 50+ 33%

Current Programs https://addisontexas.net/sites/default/files/fileattachments/parks_and_recreation/page/12631/spring2019activeaddison.pdf

151

Community Input Opportunities• Stakeholder Interviews• Business Focus Groups• Pop‐Up Events• Mapita Questionnaire• Prioritization Survey• Draft Plan Review Meetings• Over 1,150 Participants

Important Steps• Community Input• Draft Report Available to Community• Draft Report Presentation to Council• Respond to Council & Community Feedback• Present Final Plant to Council for Adoption• Implementation

Parks, Recreation & Open Space Master Plan

Other Planning Information• Athletic Club Master

Plan Update• Quorum Art Walk Master

Plan • Master Transportation Plan• Asset Management Plan

Download the Plan here: https://addisontexas.net/marketing/page/parks‐recreation‐and‐open‐space‐master‐plan‐%EF%BB%BFavailable‐community‐review

Master Plan Goals

152

Policy Objectives for Each Goal

Recommendations

153

Recommendations in Bond Proposal

Athletic Club Updates• Locker Room Reconfiguration• Lobby Core Building Reconfiguration• Gymnasium & Track Improvements• Pool Modernization

Les Lacs Pond Improvements• Replacement of Failing Pond Liner• Pond Edge Improvements• Site Improvement Amenities• Environmental Amenities• Aesthetic Amenities

Trail Rehab, Expansion & Wayfinding• Refurbishment of Existing Trail System• ADA Improvements• Additional Trail Segments• Trail Wayfinding and Safety Distance Markers• Outdoor Fitness Stations• Trail Enhancements

South Quorum Art Walk• Activity Hubs• Bus Shelter / Pedestrian Way Nodes• Wayfinding and Safety Distance Markers

Potential Bond Projects – Parks & Rec

154

Athletic Club Updates

Athletic Club Master Plan RecommendationsAthletic Club Modernization Staff Recommended Projects1. Locker Room Reconfiguration2. Lobby Core Building Reconfiguration3. Gymnasium & Track Improvements4. Pool Modernization

AAC Master Plan 51% Survey

Participants Supported Increase in

Membership Fee

Opinion on Tax Increase

In 2016 almost 80% of the survey participants were

not in favor of a tax increase to fund

improvements at the AACAdditional Needs Identified

Recently

‐ Additional Exercise Space‐ Asset Management Needs

‐ Additional Program Space Improved Facility Control

‐ Increased Need for Family Locker Rooms / Restrooms

‐ Compliance With Current Building Codes

In 2016 94% of the Participants(400 Total)

Recommended the Top Four Improvements:

1. Replace the HVAC System2. Lobby / Core Building

Improvements3. Gymnasium & Track Upgrades

4. Locker Room Upgrades

155

Front Desk

Lobby

156

Gathering Area

Child Care Area

157

Priority1

Priority2

Priority3

Priority4 Adopted Master Plan - 1st Floor

Priority1

Priority2

Priority3

Priority4

Adopted Master Plan – 2nd Floor

158

First Floor ImprovementsLobby

- New Reception Desk- Create Secure Corridor to Outdoor Pool- Circulation- Stair Modifications- New Lounge / Café Area- New Flooring, Paint & Lighting- Storage Cubbies at Fitness Areas- New Furniture & Fixtures- Install Wayfinding Signage

Childcare Area- Create Program Room for Kids 8+- Reconfigure Restrooms- Replace Walls w/ Glass for Visibility- Add Counters w/ Storage Below

Community Room

- Switch Community Room & Aerobics Studio

- Add Storage Closet for Spin Bikes

Locker Rooms

- Reconfigure Locker Rooms

- ADA Modifications- Add in Family Changing Suites- New Sauna Rooms

Mechanical Rooms-Fire Rating Upgrades- Mechanical Modifications

Accessory Areas- Relocate Staff Offices to AccommodateChildren’s Area- Convert Life Guard Room to Program

Space- Replace Walls w/ Glass for Visibility- Add Counters w/ Storage Below

Indoor Pool

- Rebuild Hot Tub

- ADA Modifications- UV Filtration

Gym

- New Basketball Goals

- LED Lighting

Note:

Proposed Modifications are based on the following:

- 2016 Adopted Master Plan Recommendations

- ADA Plan

- Asset Management Plan

- Building Code Requirements

- Staff / Community Feedback (noted in blue)

Modifications to the adopted Master Plan would require Council approval and involve a community input process

Second Floor ImprovementsTrack

- Replace Railing - Replace Track Surfacing- Paint Walls, Add in Graphics or Art- Add in Clearstory Window for Natural Light- Add in LED Lighting Over Track- Add Storage Cubbies

Restrooms- Demo 1 Restroom- Add 2 ADA Restrooms - Update Existing 2 Restrooms

Community Room

- Switch Community Room & Aerobics Studio

- Add Counters and Storage Below

Fitness Area

- Add Consulting Rooms / Staff Offices

Additional Program Space- Reconfigure Stairs- Add Additional program room

Fitness Wing- New Flooring

Note:



- ADA Plan




Modifications to the adopted Master Plan would require Council approval and involve a community input process.

159

Additional ImprovementsBuilding Related

- New Roof- ADA Modifications- Furnitures & Fixtures- Paint & Flooring- PA System - Solar Film on Skylights

Outdoor Pool- UV Filtration - Shade by Pool- Upgrade Play Elements Children’s Pool- Patio Space to Accommodate Additional Ingress / Egress

Note:



- ADA Plan




Modifications to the adopted Master Plan would require Council approval and involve a community input process

Les Lacs Pond Improvement

160

Les Lacs Pond ImprovementsBase Bid Project

• Replacement of Failing Pond Liner• ADA Improvements• Earthen Pond Edge• Sod Replacement• Fountain Replacement• Addition of One Fountain

Alternate Items Presented for Public Input • Pond Edge Improvements• Site Improvement Amenities• Environmental Amenities• Aesthetic Amenities

Les Lacs Pond Improvements

Note:

Schematic Design & Public Input Have Been Completed

Project Will Be Brought to Council in April for Feedback

161

Trail Rehab, Expansion & Wayfinding

Trail Rehab, Expansion & WayfindingCreate a Trails Master Plan

Install Trail Wayfinding and Distance Markers at:

Redding TrailBelt Way Arapaho Connector TrailArapaho TrailLes Lacs Linear TrailWhite Rock Creek TrailBeltway TrailProposed Addison Rd & Quorum Trails

Refurbish Existing Trails

Replace Wood Retaining Walls With MasonryADA ModificationsDrainage Modifications


Parks Master Plan Survey

64% Participants Said Trail Improvements Would Encourage

Them to Spend More Time in Parks

Parks Master Plan Recommendations

‐ Create Trails Master Plan‐ Plan and Develop 10 Miles

New Trail ‐ Provide Wayfinding, Mile

Markers and Interpretive Signage

‐ Improve Trail Entries

Trail Connectivity is a Game Changing

Initiative Identified byThe Park, Recreation & Open Space Master

Plan

* Expansion of Trail Along North Addison Road & Quorum are included in IDS Projects

* White Rock Creek Trail Overlook Access is Being Updated FY 2019

163

Trail Expansion

Connect Redding Trail to Proposed Midway Road TrailAdd Pedestrian Way Stop Adjacent to Les Lacs ParkAdd Pedestrian Way Stop Adjacent to Belt Line RdAdd Shaded Outdoor Fitness Stations Adjacent to Les Lacs Park &

Beltway / Arapaho Connector


South Quorum Art Walk

164

Quorum Art Walk• Pedestrian Lighting• Bus Shelter / Pedestrian Way Nodes• Wayfinding and Safety Distance Markers• Master Plan Update• Construction Documents & Construction Administration

Note:

A portion of the Quorum Trail is included in the Quorum Road Project proposed

By IDS

Current CIP Funding of $466,500 is available for the project. This will cover ½ of the

Pedestrian lighting

South Quorum Art Walk

165

South Quorum Activity Hubs

South Quorum Activity Hubs

167

Special Area Study Strategic Land Acquisition

March 11, 2019

1

Special Area Studies

2013 Comprehensive Plan found that the current land use is no longer appropriate or could be better for certain areas of Town Contemplated an in-depth study to consider

assets and detriments of properties, propose new uses and development standards, and conduct economic analyses to test concepts Creates vision that Town can use to attract

developers and guide future policy decisions and capital investments Plan identified 10 areas for study 4.5 complete

2

168

Sam’s Club Special Area Study (2014 - current) Draft Objectives: Prime location within Addison; its development should provide a good

return on investment for the owner and the Town. Recognize that Addison is an urban community. Insist on mixed use

development with an appropriate scale, density and diversity High quality design Organic expansion of existing neighborhoods into study area Add housing choices that aren’t easily found in Addison today,

particularly for “aging in place” Create new employment locations with retail, service, health/wellness

business that serve nearby residents Include people places and sidewalk/trail connections Desired connections allow for the removal of wall

3

Sam’s Club Special Area Study (2014 - current)

4

169

Inwood Road Special Area Study (2017)

5

Transportation:

T-1 Make Inwood Road safer, left-turn movements.T-2 Improve east/west access connectivity.T-3 Improve pedestrian linkages, sidewalksT-4 Allow on-street parking along new roadsT-5 Allow shared parking as appropriate.T-6 Incentivize denser development

Economic Development:ED-1 Improve financial revenue to Town through new

and diverse development.ED-2 Promote redevelopment of vacant and

underused parcels.ED-3 Consider new forms of zoning to encourage

economic investment and greater density.ED-4 Consider publicly-funded catalyst projects as a

means to encourage new development. ED-5 Encourage adaptive reuse of existing buildings

as appropriate.

Urban Design:UD-1 Make the Study Area safe and attractive.UD-2 Provide a unique and diverse collection of uses.UD-3 Promote human-scale development.UD-4 Create a memorable/brandable neighborhood.

Open Space:OS-1 Salvage mature trees.OS-2 Create green spaces.OS-3 Create a system of pathways that connect to

public spaces and private developments.OS-4 Provide sidewalks and associated amenities.

Inwood Road Special Area Study (2017)

6

170

Addison Circle Special Area Study (2019) Guiding Principles: Desired Character Relationship to Addison Circle Relationship to Addison Airport Relationship to Addison Cotton

Belt Station Economic Development Tourism

Open Space Design Public Art Gateways and Connectivity Mobility for People Automobile Use Environment & Sustainability Town Involvement & Investment

7

Addison Circle Special Area Study (2019)

8

171

Addison Circle Special Area Study (2019)

9

Implementation Obstacle Fractured Ownership

*not already publicly owned

10

Area Acres Number of Parcels

Sam’s Club 28 8Inwood 50 29

Addison Circle 12* 18*

172

Potential Implementation Strategy Parcel Accumulation

11

Should there be an amount of money set aside for strategic land acquisition that could

help catalyze redevelopment?

173

Community Bond Advisory Committee Meeting Meeting Notes March 11, 2019

The fourth meeting of the Community Bond Advisory Committee was held on March 11, 2019 at the Addison Treehouse Event Room.

The committee members present: Bruce Arfsten, Juli Branson, Lary Brown, Robert Catalani, Ralph Doherty, Kent Domingue, Jerry Dougan, Margie Gunther, Brooks Haley, Susan Halpern, Edwin Keith, JT McPherson, Jimmy Niemann, Liz Oliphant, Suzann Oliver, Denise Quintanilla, Craig Reynolds, Jason Rivera, Virginia Wallace, and Rob Wright.

Staff members present: Wes Pierson, Olivia Riley, Rob Bourestom, Hamid Khaleghipour, Charles Goff, Ashley Mitchell, Shawn Cheairs, Janna Tidwell, Chad Hancock, Miesha Johnson and Lisa Pyles.

Council Members present: Marlin Wileson and Ivan Hughes.

Chair Ralph Doherty opened the meeting.

Rob Bourestrom, Director of General Services, presented two projects for bond consideration: Roof Replacement at various town facilities and the Police Gun Range Filtration System.

Hamid Khaleghipour, Interim Deputy City Manager and Executive Director of Business Performance and Innovation, presented the Smart City Concept for bond consideration.

Janna Tidwell, Director of Parks and Recreation, presented four projects for bond consideration: Athletic Club Updates; Les Lacs Pond Improvements; Trail Rehabilitation, Expansion and Wayfinding; and the South Quorum Art Walk

Charles Goff, Assistant Director of Development Services, presented the results of various Special Area Studies and the potential land acquisition associated with them for bond consideration.


The committee was under the impression from a previous bond meeting, that the roof replacement was considered a maintenance item and therefore not eligible for bond consideration?

174

Staff has sought out clarification on this matter and discovered that an entire roof replacement would be bond eligible and therefore the committee is being presented with facilities that need a complete roof replacement for consideration.

All the roofs mentioned were stated to have a life span of 40 years or more, yet none of the roofs proposed have reached that lifespan and many are only about half that age. Is this due to an increase in technology so newer roofs are expected to last longer or are there other factors that have led to our current roofs deteriorating faster than their expected life span? What assurances are in place that proper maintenance will be done on the new roofs if they are to be replaced?

The extended life span is due to new advances in roofing technologies and better management practices. With the newer, more efficient and higher quality management and maintenance practices our new roofs should reach the longer expected life span of 40 years or more. The current roofs are not reaching their expected life span due to not being able to complete all scheduled maintenance due to budget constraints.

Is the gun range at the police station currently in compliance with Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) standards?

OSHA is a federal program and state and local governments do not fall under the OSHA mandates. However, to maintain a safe and healthy work environment and as a best management practice we do our best to adhere to the guidelines that OSHA has set.

Are there any grant funds available for work done at the Police Department?

Staff is currently exploring any grant fund availability for this project, but at this time we do not have any.

Could we close our gun range and use an offsite facility for officer training?

Officers are required to qualify twice a year on several types of weapons, including specialty weapons, this is a 3-4 week process each cycle. The range is also used for regular, required training with weapons as well as taser training. The range needs to be available 24 hours a day to accommodate the various shifts. With the amount of training and qualifying the officers do along with the hours required for the training it is preferable to maintain our own range that is under our control.

Is the lack of a proper gun range for the police officers affecting our ability to recruit candidates to Addison?

The gun range is just one of the areas that a potential candidate would look at when deciding to apply for or accept a job with the Town of Addison. Each candidate has their own individual list of priorities that will influence their decision-making process. However, having a new shooting range with high quality air filtration, can only be a positive for any potential candidates.

What is the life expectancy for the Advanced Traffic Management System (ATMS)?

The life expectancy is approximately 10 years. After that time the equipment becomes outdated and obsolete due to the advances in technology which in turn increases the difficulty to maintain due to the lack of available material and technical support.

175

Would the Town still utilize Spectrum for their wireless mesh?

The Spectrum network would be available as a redundancy.

What are the limitations on drones due to the airport or FAA?

Any limitations imposed by the airport or by FAA regulations would be investigated and adhered to prior to the implementation of the Town’s drone usage.

What is the status of the License Plate Recognition (LPR) pilot program? Is this the proper time to approve bond funding for this program?

We’ll begin collecting Data in April and should be complete with the data collection by November.

Regarding the updates to the Athletic Club, there were some updates regarding children between the ages of 8-13. What is the percentage of member families that have children in that age group?

There are 193 members in the 0-7 age group, 123 in the 8-12 and 143 in the 13-18 age group.

Do the proposed improvements to Les Lacs pond include cameras on the walking trail around it?

Yes, there will be cameras installed, however, they will be installed as part of the proposed IT projects and not the proposed Parks project.

Would it be possible to convert Les Lacs pond into a park or green space?

That is certainly something that could be considered and brought up for discussion.

How does bond funding affect any potential land purchased?

Bond funding would give the Town the ability to purchase land in proposed areas of redevelopment as it comes available and reduce the risk of the Town missing out on an opportunity due to a lack of funds readily available.

The committee would like to be presented with any potential recurring costs as well as the upfront project cost, can town staff provide this information where applicable?

Yes, recurring cost estimates can be provided to the committee.

The next Committee meeting will be on April 4, 2019 at the Addison Tree House Event Room, 14681 Midway Road, Suite 200 from 5:30 to 7:30. The meeting was adjourned at 8:30.

176



177


Agenda April 4, 2019 5:30 – 7:30


2. Approval of Notes from March 11, 2019 Meeting Ralph Doherty

3. Project Ranking Ralph Doherty, Committee

Keypad Voting Karen Walz

4. Next meeting – April 18, 2019, 5:30 to 7:50 Addison Tree House Municipal Finance and Debt Capacity

5. Closing All

178

Community Bond Advisory Committee Meeting Meeting Notes April 4, 2019

The fifth meeting of the Community Bond Advisory Committee was held on April 4, 2019 at the Addison Treehouse Event Room.

The committee members present: Bruce Arfsten, Taylor Bowen, Juli Branson, Lary Brown, Colleen Campbell, Robert Catalani, Nancy Craig, Kent Domingue, Margie Gunther, Brooks Haley, Edwin Keith, JT McPherson, Jimmy Niemann, Liz Oliphant, Suzann Oliver, Denise Quintanilla, Eileen Resnick, Craig Reynolds, Jason Rivera, Virginia Wallace, Nancy Williams and Rob Wright.

Staff members present: Wes Pierson, Olivia Riley, Rob Bourestom, Hamid Khaleghipour, Ashley Mitchell, Shawn Cheairs, Janna Tidwell, Jason Shroyer, Amanda Turner, Ashlee Powell, John Crawford and Lisa Pyles.

Council Members present: Marlin Wileson.

Vice Chair Bruce Arfsten opened the meeting.

Wes Pierson, City Manager, discussed the importance of the Asset Management Plan and how it has informed the bond program discussion.

Karen Walz from Strategic Community Solutions led the Committee in a keypad voting exercise to rank the projects according to the first four criteria, Improved Transportation, Economic Vitality / Development, Safety and Security, and Recreation and Leisure. The results of this first round of project ranking will be discussed in detail at the May 2nd meeting.

During and after the presentation, the Committee asked several questions.

Is everything listed with the roof replacement project part of the actual roof replacement, or are there maintenance items included?

All portions of the roof replacement project that has been presented are necessary elements of a roof replacement. They are not maintenance items.

What is the timeline for completion of the ADA requirements?

179

The ADA Transition Plan is a 20-year plan. Each year, projects will be presented in the annual budget proposals. As major improvement projects are proposed and implemented, ADA compliance projects will be incorporated into the scope of the project.

Are the Master Transportation Plan (MTP) elements required to be completed with these projects?

The City Council has directed that the Master Transportation Plan will be a part of all new roadway construction projects.

The next Committee meeting will be on April 18, 2019 at the Addison Tree House Event Room, 14681 Midway Road, Suite 200 from 5:30 to 7:30. The subject will be an overview of municipal financing and the Town’s capacity to issue debt. The meeting was adjourned at 7:15.

180


AGENDA 182 FINANCIAL OVERVIEW- OLIVIA RILEY & NICK BULAICH 183 NOTES 201

181


Agenda April 18, 2019

5:30 – 7:30


2. Approval of Notes from April 4, 2019 Meeting Ralph Doherty

3. Financial Overview Olivia Riley, CFO and Nick Bulaich, Hilltop Securities

4. Next meeting –

a. May 2, 2019, 5:30 to 7:50 Addison Tree House Municipal Finance and Debt Capacity

5. Closing Ralph Doherty

182

Community Bond Advisory Committee Finance

Meeting

Addison Treehouse - Event Room April 18, 2019

1

Financial Overview Agenda

Basics of Municipal DebtReview of Addison’s Current DebtBasics of Bond RatingsHistory of Recent Addison Bond ElectionsAddison’s Financial Capacity to Issue DebtBond Election Process and SchedulePost-Election Process for Issuing Debt (Pending Voter

Approval)Questions / Discussion

2

183

Basics of Municipal Debt

3

Types of Debt – Personal, Corporate, Municipal

4

Personal Debt

A person’s earning potential increases up to retirement

At retirement, a common goal is to be ‘debt‐free’ in order not to pass

on debt to heirs

People can choose to live ‘debt‐free’ by saving money for large purchases or rent/lease major

assets

Corporate Debt

Majority of companies have some form of debt

Debt is a lower cost source of funds and allows a higher return

to the equity investors by leveraging their money

Businesses are allowed to deduct the interest on the debt from

corporate income taxes

Municipal Debt

Cities exist into perpetuity and must always provide services and maintain assets and infrastructure

The cost of improvements is on both current and future users, thereby freeing up funds for

current services

In order to raise $1 million on a $4.7 billion tax base, Addison

would have a one‐time $0.021 tax rate increase. To raise $1 million through the issuance of 20‐year bonds results in $0.0015 tax rate

over a 20‐year period

184

Why Use Municipal Debt?

Finance projects, capital assets, and major improvements to existing assets over their useful lives (useful lives must be at least 20 years) with a variety of repayment options

Future beneficiaries pay their “fair share” for public improvements/service -debt is repaid overtime by citizens who are using the debt-financed asset

Finance larger projects on a more timely basis as compared to ‘pay as you go’ funding

Help minimize the volatility of the property tax collections and/or user rates as compared to ‘pay as you go’ funding

Take advantage of tax-exempt, low-cost, long-term financing

5

What are the Uses for Municipal Debt?

6

Debt Obligations

Roads

Facilities

Parks

Equipment

All projects presented by staff meetthe criteria for debt funding

185

Operating Expenses are NOT Funded by Debt

7

Addison does not use debt to finance its operating expenses

The Town’s Charter and State law requires the Town to maintain a balanced budget

Unlike the Federal government, Addison does NOT operate at a deficit

Legal Requirements of Issuing Debt

8

Texas cities have specific authorization to enter into legal debtobligations as provided in the 1876 State Constitution

All debt obligations must be approved by the City Council and theTexas Attorney General

The approval process for the most common debt obligations is asshown below:

*Note: If bond election fails, Town cannot issue CO’s for that same project for 3 years.

General Obligation Bonds

Certificates of Obligation Tax Notes Revenue Bonds

Public Approval/Notice Requirements

Bond ElectionNotice of Intent to Issue Published in

Local PaperNone Required None Required

Security/Pledge Taxes Only Taxes and/or Revenues

Taxes and/or Revenues

Revenues Only

Other Considerations

If Election fails*, how does Town address

needs?

Subject to petition by 5% of Registered

Voters

Maximum Maturity of 7 Years

Mandatory Bond convenants; higher

interest rate than tax secured debt

8

186

Review of Addison’s Current Outstanding Debt

9

Addison’s Tax Rate Components

Addison’s Fiscal Year 2019 total tax rate is $0.55000 per $100 of Taxable Assessed Valuation (“TAV”).

Addison’s municipal Tax Rate is divided into four components: Interest and Sinking (I&S) can only be used to pay the Town’s

annual bonded debt payments - $0.142648

Maintenance and Operations (M&O) used for operating expenses of the Town, such as compensation and benefits, parks, streets, facilities, and other on-going operating costs - $0.377435

Economic Development Fund - $0.023716

Infrastructure Investment Fund - $0.006201

10

187

Impact on Average Homeowner 85% of Addison’s property tax collections are generated from commercial

properties and 15% from residential homeowners. The average cost of a commercial property is difficult to determine

because the use determines type and value. For an average homeowner the impact of a 1¢ increase in property taxes

would be as follows:

11

FY2019Example for

$.01 Increase

Average Home Value $ 319,582 $ 319,582

Tax Rate $ 0.550000 $ 0.560000

Annual Tax Bill $ 1,757.70 $ 1,789.66

Additional Annual Taxes $ 31.96

Existing Debt Overview

12

As of January 31, 2019, the Town had $97,955,000 of principal and $34,169,255 of associated interest due from 2019-2039for a total outstanding debt of $132,124,255

Includes debt that is repaid by taxes, water/sewer revenue, airport, and stormwater revenues (when combined, the Town’srevenue enterprise funds – water/sewer, airport and stormwater, all pay approximately 32% of the Town’s debt service) 12

‐

1,000,000

2,000,000

3,000,000

4,000,000

5,000,000

6,000,000

7,000,000

8,000,000

9,000,000

10,000,000

2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039

Principal Interest

188

Strategic Decision Making – Long Term Long-term financial plan – 10-year planning horizon High level view of financial sustainability Assumptions used – 4.1% annual growth in taxable property

value, debt repayment scheduleMaintenance of strong financial outlook for Moody’s Aaa and

S&P’s AAA ratings Bonds committed but not issued – General Obligation (GO) bondsMidway - $13 million Vitruvian - $16 million Arts and Acquisitions - $3 million

Upcoming Issuances, not yet sold – Certificates of Obligation (CO)Midway - $25 million Addison Grove - $3.25 million

13

Tax-Supported Debt – 10-Year Capacity at Current I&S Rate

Estimated 10-Year debt capacityCommitted, unused General Obligation

Bonds and Certificates of Obligation Vitruvian $10 million General Obligation (GOs) and $6 million

Certificates of Obligation (Cos) Midway Road $13 million GOs Arts & Events Land Acquisition $3 million GOs $25 million COs for Midway Road $3.25 for COs for Addison Grove

Remaining Tax-Supported Capacity Underlying assumptions:

Based on the Town’s existing Interest & Sinking tax rate of$0.142648 and Town Officials’ tax base growth projections;Debt is assumed to be sold annually over a 10 year period

Each additional $0.01 of debt service tax rate equalsapproximately $9.1 million of additional capacity (the inverseapplies as well) over a 10 year period

‐=

14

$28,250,000

$63,940,000

$3,690,000

‐

=‐$32,000,000

189

Basics of Bond Ratings

15

Bond Ratings – Credit Criteria

16

Revenue source and legal agreements pledged to the bonds

Diversification and stability of the Town’s tax/revenue base

Ongoing capital needs

Audited Financial Reports, fund balances and historical trends

Managerial and Financial policies/procedures

Bond rating based on several criteria:

16

190

Explanation of Bond Ratings

Assessment of the ability and willingness of debt issuers to make full and timely payments, expressed as a gradeThe higher the bond rating, the lower the interest rate

Investment community can easily compare the soundness / competence of an investment.Good ratings mean well run cities.

Addison is 1 of 10 cities in Texas with Aaa and AAA ratings

17

Bond Ratings

18

Bond ratings and interest rates have an inverse correlation, meaning that the higher the issuer’sbond rating, the lower the interest rates on their borrowings and vice versa. The Town is rated“Aaa” by Moody’s and “AAA” by S&P.

Thehigher

thebo

ndratin

g…

Thelow

ertheinterestrate

Addison

Moody’s:

Aaa

S&P: AAA

18

Fitch Moody’s S&P

AAA Aaa AAA

AA+ Aa1 AA+

AA Aa2 AAAA- Aa3 AA-

A+ A1 A+

A A2 AA- A3 A-

BBB+ Baa1 BBB+

BBB Baa2 BBBBBB- Baa3 BBB-

BELOW BBB- or Baa3:Non Investment Grade / Junk

191

History of Bond Elections

19

Past Bond Election Results

2000 ‐ $48M• Extension of Arapaho and other street improvements• Belt Line Road Utilities/Streetscape• Town Hall purchase• Athletic Club Expansion/Addition of outdoor pool

2008 ‐ $58M• New Theatre• Parking• Conference space• Aviation museum

2012 ‐ $55M• Midway Road• Vitruvian• Belt Line Road signage• Land acquisition

20

• Belt Line Road Underground Utilities• Airport Land Acquisition• Arts and Events Land Acquisition• Wireless Network• Pedestrian Connectivity

192

Lessons learned from prior issuances

21

Develop complete project scope and high level cost estimates Cost estimates from master plans and other evaluations and assessments

Consider availability of project resources Financial and staffing capacity Consider disruption to businesses and public in timing of projects

Align debt issuances with Town’s strategic plan pillars and community needs Entrepreneurship and business hub Gold standard in financial health, customer service, and public safety Excellence in asset management and transportation systems Optimization of the Addison brand

Identify Long-term Needs

Evaluated Capital Improvement Projects Several large capital projects have been

identified and it has been determined that there is an immediate need to address.

Completed Asset Management Plan Town has aging infrastructure that is in

need of repair/replacement. Completed ADA Transition Plan Make programs and services accessible

to persons with disabilities.

22

Align with Strategic Plan

Specify Objective

Determine Need

Identify Issue

193

Financial Capacity to Issue Debt

23

Debt Capacity

24

Factors in Determining

Debt Capacity

Previous Obligations

Change in Net

Assessed Taxable Value

Retirement From Old

Debt

Repayment Schedule

Tax Rate Split/Debt

Levy

Debt capacity is the Town’sability to borrow funds underexisting conditions.

24

194

Impact of 2012 $55 Million Bond Election

25

Historical Interest & Sinking (I&S) Fund Tax Rate

As the Town’s taxable value has grown, the I&S tax rate has declined by over $0.075 from Fiscal Year End (FYE) 2015 to FYE 2018 Each penny of I&S tax rate is equal

to approximately $9.1 million of debt capacity (20 year amortization) over a 10-year period State Law ‘Truth in Taxation’ limits

options available to preserve the Town’s I&S tax rate

$0.1821

$0.1981

$0.2207 $0.2130 0.2181

0.2024

0.1793

0.1530

0.1426

$0.0000

$0.0500

$0.1000

$0.1500

$0.2000

$0.2500

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Historical I&S Tax Rate

26

195

Debt Issuance Analysis Assumptions & Summary

27

Initial Estimated Annual Impact On2019 Bond - Project Funding Amount Issuance Date Tax Rate Impact (1)(2)(3) Average Home Value (4)

Montfort Drive $7,300,000 Aug-22 $0.0105 $33.64Quorum Road $26,302,000 May-22 $0.0359 $114.84Addison Road $64,600,000 May-24 $0.0769 $245.75

Keller Springs Road $12,900,000 May-20 $0.0193 $61.53Trail Expansion $412,725 May-20 $0.0006 $2.05Airport Parkway $9,400,000 Aug-22 $0.0136 $43.37

Smart City $5,000,000 Aug-20 $0.0076 $24.44Roof Replacement $4,100,000 May-20 $0.0063 $20.10

HVAC Replacement $1,535,000 Aug-20 $0.0024 $7.53Land Acquisition $15,000,000 Aug-20 $0.0229 $73.33

ADA Improvements $3,800,000 Aug-20 $0.0054 $17.17Beltway to Inwood $16,100,000 Aug-25 $0.0197 $62.99

North Beltwood to Inwood $7,200,000 Aug-25 $0.0088 $28.00Athletic Club Mater Plan $4,961,326 May-20 $0.0074 $23.65

Athletic Club Associated Projects $4,742,167 May-20 $0.0071 $22.69Landmark Blvd to DNT $1,500,000 Aug-20 $0.0023 $7.43Beltway to Gillis Road $20,300,000 Aug-22 $0.0281 $89.68

Artist Way to Addison Road $1,400,000 May-20 $0.0022 $6.93Les Lacs Pond $3,282,110 Aug-24 $0.0041 $13.13

Police Gun Range Improvements $360,000 May-20 $0.0005 $1.71Beltway to Arapaho Road $12,600,000 Aug-26 $0.0149 $47.55

$222,795,328

(1) Town’s Future Taxable Assessed Valuations assume 4.1% annual growth through 2038 as supplied by Town officials.(2) Assumes tax collection percentage of 99%(3) Assumes 2019 issuances are current rates plus 0.75% = 4.50%; 2020 issuances are current rates plus 1.00% = 4.75%; 2021 issuances and beyond are current rates plus 1.25% = 5.00%. All

insuances assumed to be amortized over 20 years.(4) Assumes average home value of $319,582

Estimated Impact of $60 Million Bond Election

28

0.1428

0.1510 0.1724

0.2527

‐

0.0500

0.1000

0.1500

0.2000

0.2500

0.3000Debt Service Tax Rate Analysis (1)(2)(3)

Projected Tax Rate for Existing Debt Projected Tax Rate Existing PLUS Committed Projects Existing + Committed + 2019 Potential Bond Projects

Assumptions:(1) Future Taxable Assessed Values assume 4.1% growth through 2038 as supplied by Town officials.(2) Tax Collection Percentage: 99%(3) Interest Rate Assumptions:

2019 Sales assume current rates plus 0.75% = 4.50%2020 Sales assume current rates plus 1.00% = 4.75%2021 Sales and beyond assume current rates plus 1.25% = 5.00%

Estimated I&S Tax Rate Impact(1)(2)(3)

2019 Bond TotalFYE Existing "Committed" Projects Projected2019 0.1428$ ‐$ ‐$ 0.1428$ 2020 0.1182 0.0328 ‐ 0.1510 2021 0.1138 0.0491 0.0526 0.2155 2022 0.1080 0.0643 0.0803 0.2527 2023 0.1039 0.0618 0.0867 0.2524 2024 0.0998 0.0639 0.0835 0.2472 2025 0.0961 0.0614 0.0802 0.2377 2026 0.0925 0.0673 0.0772 0.2369 2027 0.0889 0.0646 0.0741 0.2276 2028 0.0786 0.0621 0.0713 0.2120 2029 0.0705 0.0595 0.0682 0.1983 2030 0.0678 0.0573 0.0656 0.1907 2031 0.0653 0.0618 0.0631 0.1901 2032 0.0624 0.0592 0.0605 0.1821 2033 0.0430 0.0570 0.0581 0.1581 2034 0.0179 0.0547 0.0559 0.1285 2035 0.0070 0.0526 0.0536 0.1131 2036 0.0066 0.0506 0.0516 0.1088 2037 0.0064 0.0486 0.0495 0.1046 2038 ‐ 0.0467 0.0475 0.0942 2039 ‐ 0.0466 0.0475 0.0941 2040 ‐ 0.0308 0.0476 0.0784 2041 0.0219 0.0210 0.0429 2042 0.0128 0.0053 0.0181 2043 0.0129 ‐ 0.0129 2044 0.0102 ‐ 0.0102 2045 0.0103 ‐ 0.0103 2046 0.0051 ‐ 0.0051 2047 0.0052 ‐ 0.0052 2048 0.0051 ‐ 0.0051 2049 0.0051 ‐ 0.0051 2050 0.0051 ‐ 0.0051

196


29

0.1428

0.1510 0.1724

0.3263

‐

0.0500

0.1000

0.1500

0.2000

0.2500

0.3000




2019 Bond TotalFYE Existing "Committed" Projects Projected2019 0.1428$ ‐$ ‐$ 0.1428$ 2020 0.1182 0.0328 ‐ 0.1510 2021 0.1138 0.0491 0.0526 0.2155 2022 0.1080 0.0643 0.0803 0.2527 2023 0.1039 0.0618 0.1114 0.2770 2024 0.0998 0.0639 0.1319 0.2956 2025 0.0961 0.0614 0.1688 0.3263 2026 0.0925 0.0673 0.1660 0.3258 2027 0.0889 0.0646 0.1439 0.2974 2028 0.0786 0.0621 0.1533 0.2939 2029 0.0705 0.0595 0.1471 0.2771 2030 0.0678 0.0573 0.1412 0.2663 2031 0.0653 0.0618 0.1359 0.2629 2032 0.0624 0.0592 0.1302 0.2518 2033 0.0430 0.0570 0.1252 0.2252 2034 0.0179 0.0547 0.1203 0.1929 2035 0.0070 0.0526 0.1154 0.1750 2036 0.0066 0.0506 0.1111 0.1683 2037 0.0064 0.0486 0.1066 0.1616 2038 ‐ 0.0467 0.1024 0.1491 2039 ‐ 0.0466 0.1024 0.1489 2040 ‐ 0.0308 0.1024 0.1332 2041 0.0219 0.0758 0.0977 2042 0.0128 0.0602 0.0730 2043 0.0129 0.0414 0.0543 2044 0.0102 0.0273 0.0375 2045 0.0103 0.0022 0.0125 2046 0.0051 ‐ 0.0051 2047 0.0052 ‐ 0.0052 2048 0.0051 ‐ 0.0051 2049 0.0051 ‐ 0.0051 2050 0.0051 ‐ 0.0051




30



0.1428

0.1510 0.1724

0.3862

‐

0.0500

0.1000

0.1500

0.2000

0.2500

0.3000

0.3500

0.4000




2019 Bond TotalFYE Existing "Committed" Projects Projected2019 0.1428$ ‐$ ‐$ 0.1428$ 2020 0.1182 0.0328 ‐ 0.1510 2021 0.1138 0.0491 0.0526 0.2155 2022 0.1080 0.0643 0.0803 0.2527 2023 0.1039 0.0618 0.1114 0.2770 2024 0.0998 0.0639 0.1319 0.2956 2025 0.0961 0.0614 0.1688 0.3263 2026 0.0925 0.0673 0.1696 0.3294 2027 0.0889 0.0646 0.2314 0.3849 2028 0.0786 0.0621 0.2455 0.3862 2029 0.0705 0.0595 0.2561 0.3862 2030 0.0678 0.0573 0.2460 0.3711 2031 0.0653 0.0618 0.2365 0.3635 2032 0.0624 0.0592 0.2269 0.3485 2033 0.0430 0.0570 0.2179 0.3179 2034 0.0179 0.0547 0.2095 0.2821 2035 0.0070 0.0526 0.2011 0.2607 2036 0.0066 0.0506 0.1934 0.2506 2037 0.0064 0.0486 0.1857 0.2407 2038 ‐ 0.0467 0.1783 0.2250 2039 ‐ 0.0466 0.1782 0.2248 2040 ‐ 0.0308 0.1783 0.2091 2041 0.0219 0.1518 0.1737 2042 0.0128 0.1362 0.1490 2043 0.0129 0.1173 0.1302 2044 0.0102 0.1033 0.1135 2045 0.0103 0.0781 0.0884 2046 0.0051 0.0737 0.0788 2047 0.0052 0.0087 0.0139 2048 0.0051 ‐ 0.0051 2049 0.0051 ‐ 0.0051 2050 0.0051 ‐ 0.0051

197

Bond Election Process and Schedule

31

Bond Election Process

• Project Inventory/Listing developedInventory

• Bond Advisory Committee established by CouncilCommittee

• Bond Advisory Committee Provides RecommendationsRecommendations

• Proceed According to Bond Election Schedule Election Schedule

• Hold ElectionElection

• Consider Bond Issuance OptionsFinancing

32

198

33

Call bond election

Publish notice of election

Post notice of election

Early voting

Election Day

Canvass election

Bond Sale

Bond Election Schedule

August 7 - 19

October 6 - 22

October 15

October 21 - Nov 1

November 5

November 8 - 18

December

November 2019 Proposed Election Date

Action

Post Election Activities

34

199

Post-Election Process for Issuing Debt

35

Phase 1

Develop FinancingProgram

Prepare Documentation

Phase 4

Phase 2

Phase 3

Phase 7

Phase 6

Post Issuance Record Keeping &

Reporting

Conduct Marketing, Sale of Debt, and

Closing

Set Financing Terms

Coordinate Related Service Providers

Debt IssuanceProcess

Coordinate Rating AgencyReview Process

Phase 5

35

Questions / Discussion

36

200

Community Bond Advisory Committee Meeting Meeting Notes April 18, 2019

The sixth meeting of the Community Bond Advisory Committee was held on April 18, 2019 at the Addison Treehouse Event Room.

The committee members present: Bruce Arfsten, Taylor Bowen, Juli Branson, Lary Brown, Colleen Campbell, Robert Catalani, Mary Jo Cater, Nancy Craig, Chris DeFrancisco, Ralph Doherty, Kent Domingue, Jerry Dougan, Darren Gardner, Brooks Haley, Susan Halpern, Edwin Keith, JT McPherson, Jimmy Niemann, Liz Oliphant, Suzann Oliver, Eileen Resnik, Craig Reynolds, Nancy Williams and Rob Wright.

Staff members present: Wes Pierson, Olivia Riley, Rob Bourestom, Hamid Khaleghipour, Ashley Mitchell, Shawn Cheairs, Janna Tidwell, Wilson Kakembo, Amanda Turner, Ashlee Powell, John Crawford, Charles Goff and Lisa Pyles.

Council Members present: Marlin Willesen and Ivan Hughes.

Lisa Pyles opened the meeting by introducing the financial team involved in the bond process.

Olivia Riley, Chief Financial Officer and Nick Bulaich, Hilltop Securities presented information on the Basics of Municipal Debt.


Why do we use Certificates of Obligation (CO) rather than General Obligation (GO) Bonds? What are the differences between the two? Is there a difference in the rate between them?

The main difference is a CO does not require a public bond election whereas a GO does. There is a faster issuance time for CO’s. CO’s are also issued if the debt is repaid from an enterprise fund and therefore would not affect the tax rate. Generally, there is not a significant difference in the interest rate between the two different types. Interest rates are primarily impacted by the bond rating and the market.

What all taxes are used in repaying a bond?

Ad Valorem tax is utilized to repay a bond debt.

Does the state govern the use of a CO? Who determines what a CO can be used for?

201

The State has determined that bonds cannot be used for economic development incentives. All other bond policies are set and defined by the Town’s financial and capital policies.

How is the makeup of the $.55 tax rate determined? Is it a fixed rate?

The Economic Development and the Infrastructure Investment Fund rates are set by City Council and can only be adjusted by City Council. The Interest and Sinking (I&S) and the Maintenance and Operations (M&O) rates are not fixed and will be adjusted according to what is needed to pay back the Town’s debt. Whatever amount is needed to pay back the towns debt without excess will be set as the I&S rate and whatever is remaining is used to cover M&O.

Is there a way to see if we would need to have recurring bond issuances?

Yes, the asset management plan is the beginning of this, as it details when we would normally see all the different assets begin to fail and when they would need to be replaced. This will help us plan for future debt as we will have the data to support how much funding would be needed to maintain all the Town’s assets in optimal condition.

What is more important to new businesses, the tax rate or the amenities/ quality of life?

Ultimately this will depend on the desires of each individual business. During an evaluation of where to place your home business both factors must be considered. Ideally a business owner would like to be someplace where the employees can enjoy a great quality of life and still be able to maintain their expenses partly due to a lower tax rate. The Town of Addison strives to provide both benefits to all their businesses both presently and in the future.

The next Committee meeting will be on May 2, 2019 at the Addison Tree House Event Room, 14681 Midway Road, Suite 200 from 5:30 to 7:30. The subject will be a review of the survey polling results. The meeting was adjourned at 7:15.

202


AGENDA 204 KEYPAD POLLING RESULTS 205 ONLINE SURVEY RESULTS 231 NOTES 296

203


Agenda May 2, 2019 5:30 – 7:30


2. Approval of Notes from April 18, 2019 Meeting Ralph Doherty

3. Review Survey Results Lisa Pyles and Karen Walz

4. Discussion of Propositions Ralph Doherty

5. Next meeting – a. May 9, 2019, 5:30 to 7:50 Addison Tree House

Drafting the Report to Council


204

Addison Bond Committee Keypad Polling

TO: Town of Addison and 2019 Addison Bond Committee

FROM: Karen Walz FAICP, Principal

Strategic Community Solutions LLC

DATE: April 13, 2019

RE: Results of April 4, 2019 Keypad Polling

The City Council of the Town of Addison has appointed a Bond Committee to make recommendations related to a possible bond election for November 2019. The Bond Committee has held a series of meetings to learn about a wide range of projects that could be considered for inclusion in that bond program. The Town chose to use keypad polling as part of the Committee’s discussion process. Strategic Community Solutions LLC was asked to provide the keypad polling system, design and analysis. Keypad polling was conducted as part of the Bond Committee’s meeting on April 4, 2019. This report describes the technique and presents the results of the polling exercise. These are initial results, for use as the Bond Committee continues its deliberations.

Keypad Polling Keypad polling is a technique for obtaining input or feedback from a group of participants. It uses hand‐held keypads and wireless technology to poll all participants at once. The polling is immediate and anonymous. The results are projected on the screen so participants can immediately see the results. As a result, all participants can quickly gain a sense of the group’s degree of agreement and the extent to which an individual’s own perspective is shared by other group members. This technique summarizes the input from all group members to specific questions, so it complements the individual comments received through other participation techniques, such as open‐ended question and answer sessions.

After the session in which the keypad polling is used, the results are exported to an Excel spreadsheet, where they can be evaluated in more detail. This detailed analysis provides a more complete analysis than is possible during the session.

Logistics for April 4th The Committee met at 5:30 p.m. at the Addison Treehouse. Twenty‐one Committee members participated in the keypad polling exercise. However, not all participants answered each question. The attachments to this report include the results of all polling, including the number of responses to each question. In order to gain a sense of the relative importance of each item, the ranking results discussed below are presented as percentages of those who did respond.

The keypad polling exercise considered twenty‐one possible bond projects the Committee had discussed at prior meetings. These projects are listed in Exhibit 1 on the next page. The Committee had previously considered the criteria that should be used to evaluate the importance of each bond project. Committee members provided their suggested criteria to Committee Chair Ralph Doherty. Chair Doherty and Addison’s Infrastructure and Development Services Director, Lisa Pyles, worked together to develop a set of criteria that reflected this Committee input. Eight criteria were defined. These criteria are presented in Exhibit 2. For the purposes of the April 4th keypad polling exercise, only the first four criteria were used. These four – improved transportation, economic vitality / development, safety and

205


Exhibit 1: Possible 2019 Bond Program Projects Information Technology Proposed Bond Projects (1)

1. Information Technology Initiatives – Smart CityGeneral Services Proposed Bond Projects (4)

2. Improvements needed to address Americans with Disabilities Act compliance3. Roof Replacements on Town‐owned Buildings4. Police Gun Range Air Filtration System5. HVAC Replacement at Town‐Owned Buildings

Parks Department Proposed Bond Projects (4) 6. Projects recommended in the approved Athletic Club Update Master Plan7. Additional recommended Athletic Club Improvement Projects8. Les Lacs Pond Improvements9. Trail Rehabilitation, Expansion, and addition of wayfinding elements

Infrastructure Department Proposed Street Reconstruction Bond Projects (11) Current Roadways

10. Keller Springs Road11. Airport Parkway12. Quorum Drive13. Montfort Drive14. Addison Road

Future Roadways 15. Beltway to Gillis Road16. Beltway Drive to Arapaho Road17. Landmark Boulevard to Dallas North Tollway18. North Beltwood Parkway to Inwood Road19. Beltway Drive to Inwood Road20. Artist Way to Addison Road

Special Area Studies (1) 21. Special Area Study Strategic Land Acquisition

security, and recreation and leisure – are criteria that relate most directly to the experience an Addison resident would have in the community. For this meeting, the Committee members focused just on this aspect of the evaluation. The complete list of criteria will be considered later in the Committee’s deliberations.

Keypad polling slides were used to obtain initial Committee feedback about the importance of each possible project in terms of each of these four criteria. This approach allows the tabulation of feedback according to each criterion, and also permits an evaluation of the projects when all four criteria are considered together. With this format, 84 polling slides were used (as well as two ‘practice’ slides). The results of this polling are presented in the following sections of this report.

206


Exhibit 2: Bond Committee Criteria

Bond Committee Criteria

9

Effective Management

• Facilityconsolidation

• Interdependencies• Reduce excess facilities

• Value proposition inall

• Aggregate smallproperties

Strategic Direction

• Priority – Mostimportant first

• Timing of project• When, multipleyears

• Manage and spendfunds judiciously

• Invest in future• TOA acquire todevelop

Asset Management

• Useful Life usage• Asset management‐ Red, Yellow, Green

• Minimize "deferredmaintenance'

Fiscal Responsibility

• Cost / Best estimate• Future costimplications

• Considerencumbrances

• Fiscal management• CorporateSponsorships

• New avenues offunding

• Benefit to taxpayers• Bonding capacity

207


Overall Results Exhibit 3 below presents a ranking of the projects based on the combined set of criteria. This ranking is developed by sorting the projects based on the percentage of responses of “Very Important”, and then the percentage of “Somewhat Important” responses.

Exhibit 3: How Important is this Project in terms of All Criteria Combined? (Criteria Weighted Equally, Sorted by VI, then SI)

Project Very important (VI)

Somewhat important (SI)

Somewhat unimportant (SU)

Very unimportant

(VU)

I’m not sure (NS)

12 47.6% 25.0% 15.5% 11.9% 0.0% 13 46.6% 29.0% 7.4% 17.0% 0.0% 10 45.2% 26.2% 15.5% 13.1% 0.0% 14 42.4% 30.1% 10.8% 16.8% 0.0% 3 33.2% 20.0% 15.1% 30.4% 1.3% 6 31.0% 13.1% 17.9% 38.1% 0.0%

18 29.8% 17.0% 11.0% 37.4% 4.8% 19 28.1% 19.3% 15.8% 36.8% 0.0% 5 27.7% 25.5% 15.9% 30.8% 0.0%

11 27.4% 32.1% 15.5% 25.0% 0.0% 1 23.4% 32.2% 20.3% 17.7% 6.4% 7 22.9% 16.9% 14.6% 45.7% 0.0%

21 22.6% 28.6% 9.5% 34.5% 4.8% 9 21.5% 43.4% 10.8% 23.0% 1.3% 4 18.9% 11.4% 10.1% 58.3% 1.3%

17 17.1% 21.8% 19.1% 40.8% 1.2% 2 15.3% 33.2% 16.9% 34.6% 0.0% 8 14.6% 15.9% 22.9% 46.5% 0.0%

15 11.9% 20.4% 18.2% 48.3% 1.2% 20 8.3% 23.8% 17.9% 40.5% 9.5% 16 8.3% 15.5% 17.9% 54.8% 3.6%

This exhibit shows that none of the projects received a majority of responses that the project was “Very Important” when all criteria are considered. It also shows, however, that many projects are considered to be either “Very Important” or “Somewhat Important” by most of the participating Committee members.

Exhibit 4 presents a ranking that considers both the “Very Important” and “Somewhat Important” responses. This exhibit shows that ten of the twenty‐one projects are important to a majority of the participating Committee members.

Both exhibits show that the top four projects for Committee members are those that involve reconstruction of current roadways – Keller Springs Road (#10), Quorum Drive (#12), Montfort Drive (#13) and Addison Road (#14). Over 40% of Committee members rated these projects as “Very

208


Important”. Project #3, the Roof Replacements on Town Buildings, was the fifth‐highest project in terms of “Very Important” responses. Project #9, for Trail Rehabilitation, Expansion and Way‐finding, was the fifth‐highest project in terms of overall “Important” responses.

Exhibit 4: How Important is this Project in terms of All Criteria Combined? (Criteria Weighted Equally, Sorted by VI plus SI ratings)

Project Very important

(VI)

Somewhat important

(SI)

Somewhat unimportant

(SU)

Very unimportant

(VU)

I’m not sure (NS)

VI + SI

13 46.6% 29.0% 7.4% 17.0% 0.0% 75.6% 12 47.6% 25.0% 15.5% 11.9% 0.0% 72.6% 14 42.4% 30.1% 10.8% 16.8% 0.0% 72.4% 10 45.2% 26.2% 15.5% 13.1% 0.0% 71.4% 9 21.5% 43.4% 10.8% 23.0% 1.3% 64.9%

11 27.4% 32.1% 15.5% 25.0% 0.0% 59.5% 1 23.4% 32.2% 20.3% 17.7% 6.4% 55.6% 5 27.7% 25.5% 15.9% 30.8% 0.0% 53.3% 3 33.2% 20.0% 15.1% 30.4% 1.3% 53.2%

21 22.6% 28.6% 9.5% 34.5% 4.8% 51.2% 2 15.3% 33.2% 16.9% 34.6% 0.0% 48.5%

19 28.1% 19.3% 15.8% 36.8% 0.0% 47.4% 18 29.8% 17.0% 11.0% 37.4% 4.8% 46.8% 6 31.0% 13.1% 17.9% 38.1% 0.0% 44.0% 7 22.9% 16.9% 14.6% 45.7% 0.0% 39.8%

17 17.1% 21.8% 19.1% 40.8% 1.2% 38.9% 15 11.9% 20.4% 18.2% 48.3% 1.2% 32.3% 20 8.3% 23.8% 17.9% 40.5% 9.5% 32.1% 8 14.6% 15.9% 22.9% 46.5% 0.0% 30.5% 4 18.9% 11.4% 10.1% 58.3% 1.3% 30.3%

16 8.3% 15.5% 17.9% 54.8% 3.6% 23.8%

Continuing Committee Deliberation These results are initial responses to the information about these projects and the Committee’s discussions through April 4, 2019. At the Bond Committee’s next meeting, on April 18, 2019, Town staff will present additional information about financial issues related to bonds. This new information will add to the Committee’s consideration and will enable them to consider all eight of the criteria for ranking possible bond projects.

After the April 18th meeting, all Committee members will be invited to use an online survey tool to provide input about all projects according to all eight criteria. The results of this added perspective will be provided to the Committee for discussion on May 2, 2019. The online survey will also ask Committee members to weight the various criteria, since some of them may be more important to the Committee

209


than others. The Committee will review these results as they finalize their recommendations to City Council.

Background Information Three tables with background information about the keypad polling results are attached to this memo.

Table 1 presents the results of all polling questions. The projects are listed individually. Columns in the table show the results for each project and each criterion. A final column shows the results when all criteria are combined and weighted equally. The table shows both the absolute number of responses and the percentage distribution of responses.

Table 2 presents these results, but only in terms of the percentage responses.

Table 3 ranks the projects according to the set of criteria. As in Exhibit 3 above, this ranking is developed by sorting the projects based on the percentage of responses of “Very Important”, and then the percentage of “Somewhat Important” responses.

210

Table 1: Keypad Polling Data

3. How important is project 1 in terms of Improved Transportation? (Multiple Choice)Very

importantSomewhat important


Very unimportant

I’m not sure Totals

Percent 26.3% 42.1% 15.8% 10.5% 5.3% 100.0%Count 5 8 3 2 1 19

4. How important is project 1 in terms of Economic Vitality / Development? (Multiple Choice)Very



Very unimportant


Percent 15.0% 35.0% 35.0% 5.0% 10.0% 100.0%Count 3 7 7 1 2 20

5. How important is project 1 in terms of Safety and Security? (Multiple Choice)Very



Very unimportant


Percent 47.4% 31.6% 10.5% 5.3% 5.3% 100.0%Count 9 6 2 1 1 19

6. How important is project 1 in terms of Recreation and Leisure? (Multiple Choice)Very



Very unimportant


Percent 5.0% 20.0% 20.0% 50.0% 5.0% 100.0%Count 1 4 4 10 1 20




Very unimportant


Percent 26.3% 15.8% 21.1% 36.8% 0.0% 100.0%Count 5 3 4 7 0 19




Very unimportant


Percent 0.0% 36.8% 31.6% 31.6% 0.0% 100.0%Count 0 7 6 6 0 19




Very unimportant


Percent 25.0% 45.0% 5.0% 25.0% 0.0% 100.0%Count 5 9 1 5 0 20




Very unimportant


Percent 10.0% 35.0% 10.0% 45.0% 0.0% 100.0%Count 2 7 2 9 0 20




Very unimportant


Percent 27.8% 0.0% 5.6% 66.7% 0.0% 100.0%Count 5 0 1 12 0 18

April 4, 2019 211





Very unimportant


Percent 35.0% 25.0% 10.0% 25.0% 5.0% 100.0%Count 7 5 2 5 1 20




Very unimportant


Percent 40.0% 40.0% 15.0% 5.0% 0.0% 100.0%Count 8 8 3 1 0 20




Very unimportant


Percent 30.0% 15.0% 30.0% 25.0% 0.0% 100.0%Count 6 3 6 5 0 20




Very unimportant


Percent 10.5% 0.0% 0.0% 89.5% 0.0% 100.0%Count 2 0 0 17 0 19




Very unimportant


Percent 5.0% 10.0% 20.0% 65.0% 0.0% 100.0%Count 1 2 4 13 0 20




Very unimportant


Percent 60.0% 25.0% 10.0% 5.0% 0.0% 100.0%Count 12 5 2 1 0 20




Very unimportant


Percent 0.0% 10.5% 10.5% 73.7% 5.3% 100.0%Count 0 2 2 14 1 19




Very unimportant


Percent 0.0% 10.0% 10.0% 80.0% 0.0% 100.0%Count 0 2 2 16 0 20




Very unimportant


Percent 30.0% 35.0% 25.0% 10.0% 0.0% 100.0%Count 6 7 5 2 0 20

April 4, 2019 212





Very unimportant


Percent 42.9% 28.6% 14.3% 14.3% 0.0% 100.0%Count 9 6 3 3 0 21




Very unimportant


Percent 38.1% 28.6% 14.3% 19.0% 0.0% 100.0%Count 8 6 3 4 0 21




Very unimportant


Percent 4.8% 0.0% 0.0% 95.2% 0.0% 100.0%Count 1 0 0 20 0 21




Very unimportant


Percent 33.3% 19.0% 33.3% 14.3% 0.0% 100.0%Count 7 4 7 3 0 21




Very unimportant


Percent 14.3% 19.0% 33.3% 33.3% 0.0% 100.0%Count 3 4 7 7 0 21




Very unimportant


Percent 71.4% 14.3% 4.8% 9.5% 0.0% 100.0%Count 15 3 1 2 0 21




Very unimportant


Percent 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 100.0%Count 0 0 0 21 0 21




Very unimportant


Percent 9.5% 33.3% 28.6% 28.6% 0.0% 100.0%Count 2 7 6 6 0 21




Very unimportant


Percent 20.0% 20.0% 25.0% 35.0% 0.0% 100.0%Count 4 4 5 7 0 20

April 4, 2019 213





Very unimportant


Percent 61.9% 14.3% 4.8% 19.0% 0.0% 100.0%Count 13 3 1 4 0 21




Very unimportant


Percent 0.0% 4.8% 0.0% 95.2% 0.0% 100.0%Count 0 1 0 20 0 21




Very unimportant


Percent 9.5% 9.5% 38.1% 42.9% 0.0% 100.0%Count 2 2 8 9 0 21




Very unimportant


Percent 19.0% 14.3% 28.6% 38.1% 0.0% 100.0%Count 4 3 6 8 0 21




Very unimportant


Percent 30.0% 35.0% 25.0% 10.0% 0.0% 100.0%Count 6 7 5 2 0 20




Very unimportant


Percent 10.0% 45.0% 5.0% 35.0% 5.0% 100.0%Count 2 9 1 7 1 20




Very unimportant


Percent 9.5% 42.9% 19.0% 28.6% 0.0% 100.0%Count 2 9 4 6 0 21




Very unimportant


Percent 23.8% 42.9% 14.3% 19.0% 0.0% 100.0%Count 5 9 3 4 0 21




Very unimportant


Percent 42.9% 42.9% 4.8% 9.5% 0.0% 100.0%Count 9 9 1 2 0 21

April 4, 2019 214





Very unimportant


Percent 85.7% 0.0% 9.5% 4.8% 0.0% 100.0%Count 18 0 2 1 0 21




Very unimportant


Percent 57.1% 38.1% 0.0% 4.8% 0.0% 100.0%Count 12 8 0 1 0 21




Very unimportant


Percent 33.3% 42.9% 14.3% 9.5% 0.0% 100.0%Count 7 9 3 2 0 21




Very unimportant


Percent 4.8% 23.8% 38.1% 33.3% 0.0% 100.0%Count 1 5 8 7 0 21




Very unimportant


Percent 57.1% 28.6% 4.8% 9.5% 0.0% 100.0%Count 12 6 1 2 0 21




Very unimportant


Percent 33.3% 47.6% 4.8% 14.3% 0.0% 100.0%Count 7 10 1 3 0 21




Very unimportant


Percent 19.0% 33.3% 19.0% 28.6% 0.0% 100.0%Count 4 7 4 6 0 21




Very unimportant


Percent 0.0% 19.0% 33.3% 47.6% 0.0% 100.0%Count 0 4 7 10 0 21




Very unimportant


Percent 81.0% 4.8% 9.5% 4.8% 0.0% 100.0%Count 17 1 2 1 0 21

April 4, 2019 215





Very unimportant


Percent 61.9% 23.8% 9.5% 4.8% 0.0% 100.0%Count 13 5 2 1 0 21




Very unimportant


Percent 28.6% 38.1% 19.0% 14.3% 0.0% 100.0%Count 6 8 4 3 0 21




Very unimportant


Percent 19.0% 33.3% 23.8% 23.8% 0.0% 100.0%Count 4 7 5 5 0 21




Very unimportant


Percent 76.2% 9.5% 0.0% 14.3% 0.0% 100.0%Count 16 2 0 3 0 21




Very unimportant


Percent 61.9% 19.0% 4.8% 14.3% 0.0% 100.0%Count 13 4 1 3 0 21




Very unimportant


Percent 33.3% 52.4% 0.0% 14.3% 0.0% 100.0%Count 7 11 0 3 0 21




Very unimportant


Percent 15.0% 35.0% 25.0% 25.0% 0.0% 100.0%Count 3 7 5 5 0 20




Very unimportant


Percent 61.9% 14.3% 9.5% 14.3% 0.0% 100.0%Count 13 3 2 3 0 21




Very unimportant


Percent 60.0% 25.0% 5.0% 10.0% 0.0% 100.0%Count 12 5 1 2 0 20

April 4, 2019 216





Very unimportant


Percent 38.1% 33.3% 9.5% 19.0% 0.0% 100.0%Count 8 7 2 4 0 21




Very unimportant


Percent 9.5% 47.6% 19.0% 23.8% 0.0% 100.0%Count 2 10 4 5 0 21




Very unimportant


Percent 28.6% 28.6% 9.5% 33.3% 0.0% 100.0%Count 6 6 2 7 0 21




Very unimportant


Percent 19.0% 38.1% 14.3% 28.6% 0.0% 100.0%Count 4 8 3 6 0 21




Very unimportant


Percent 0.0% 15.0% 25.0% 60.0% 0.0% 100.0%Count 0 3 5 12 0 20




Very unimportant


Percent 0.0% 0.0% 23.8% 71.4% 4.8% 100.0%Count 0 0 5 15 1 21




Very unimportant


Percent 19.0% 28.6% 14.3% 33.3% 4.8% 100.0%Count 4 6 3 7 1 21




Very unimportant


Percent 14.3% 33.3% 4.8% 42.9% 4.8% 100.0%Count 3 7 1 9 1 21




Very unimportant


Percent 0.0% 0.0% 28.6% 66.7% 4.8% 100.0%Count 0 0 6 14 1 21

April 4, 2019 217





Very unimportant


Percent 0.0% 0.0% 23.8% 76.2% 0.0% 100.0%Count 0 0 5 16 0 21




Very unimportant


Percent 35.0% 30.0% 5.0% 30.0% 0.0% 100.0%Count 7 6 1 6 0 20




Very unimportant


Percent 33.3% 28.6% 14.3% 23.8% 0.0% 100.0%Count 7 6 3 5 0 21




Very unimportant


Percent 0.0% 19.0% 28.6% 52.4% 0.0% 100.0%Count 0 4 6 11 0 21




Very unimportant


Percent 0.0% 9.5% 28.6% 57.1% 4.8% 100.0%Count 0 2 6 12 1 21




Very unimportant


Percent 57.1% 14.3% 4.8% 19.0% 4.8% 100.0%Count 12 3 1 4 1 21




Very unimportant


Percent 57.1% 9.5% 4.8% 23.8% 4.8% 100.0%Count 12 2 1 5 1 21




Very unimportant


Percent 5.0% 30.0% 20.0% 40.0% 5.0% 100.0%Count 1 6 4 8 1 20




Very unimportant


Percent 0.0% 14.3% 14.3% 66.7% 4.8% 100.0%Count 0 3 3 14 1 21

April 4, 2019 218





Very unimportant


Percent 60.0% 5.0% 10.0% 25.0% 0.0% 100.0%Count 12 1 2 5 0 20




Very unimportant


Percent 47.6% 33.3% 0.0% 19.0% 0.0% 100.0%Count 10 7 0 4 0 21




Very unimportant


Percent 4.8% 19.0% 38.1% 38.1% 0.0% 100.0%Count 1 4 8 8 0 21




Very unimportant


Percent 0.0% 20.0% 15.0% 65.0% 0.0% 100.0%Count 0 4 3 13 0 20




Very unimportant


Percent 23.8% 38.1% 0.0% 33.3% 4.8% 100.0%Count 5 8 0 7 1 21




Very unimportant


Percent 9.5% 23.8% 23.8% 33.3% 9.5% 100.0%Count 2 5 5 7 2 21




Very unimportant


Percent 0.0% 19.0% 33.3% 38.1% 9.5% 100.0%Count 0 4 7 8 2 21




Very unimportant


Percent 0.0% 14.3% 14.3% 57.1% 14.3% 100.0%Count 0 3 3 12 3 21




Very unimportant


Percent 14.3% 38.1% 14.3% 28.6% 4.8% 100.0%Count 3 8 3 6 1 21

April 4, 2019 219





Very unimportant


Percent 57.1% 19.0% 4.8% 19.0% 0.0% 100.0%Count 12 4 1 4 0 21




Very unimportant


Percent 4.8% 38.1% 9.5% 42.9% 4.8% 100.0%Count 1 8 2 9 1 21




Very unimportant


Percent 14.3% 19.0% 9.5% 47.6% 9.5% 100.0%Count 3 4 2 10 2 21

April 4, 2019 220

Table 2: All Responses, By Percentage

How Important is this Project in terms of this Criteria?Criteria

Improved Transportation

Economic Vitality /

Development

Safety and

SecurityRecreation and Leisure

All Criteria, Equal Weight

Project 1 1 1 1 1Very important 26.3% 15.0% 47.4% 5.0% 23.4%Somewhat important 42.1% 35.0% 31.6% 20.0% 32.2%Somewhat unimportant 15.8% 35.0% 10.5% 20.0% 20.3%

Very unimportant 10.5% 5.0% 5.3% 50.0% 17.7%I’m not sure 5.3% 10.0% 5.3% 5.0% 6.4%







April 4, 2019 221




Economic Vitality /

Development

Safety and











April 4, 2019 222




Economic Vitality /

Development

Safety and











April 4, 2019 223




Economic Vitality /

Development

Safety and











April 4, 2019 224




Economic Vitality /

Development

Safety and











April 4, 2019 225




Economic Vitality /

Development

Safety and





April 4, 2019 226

Table 3: Project Ranking by Criteria

How Important is this Project in terms of Improved Transportation? (Sorted by VI, then SI)

Project

Very important

(VI)

Somewhat important

(SI)


(SU)

Very unimportant

(VU)I’m not sure (NS)

10 85.7% 0.0% 9.5% 4.8% 0.0%12 81.0% 4.8% 9.5% 4.8% 0.0%13 76.2% 9.5% 0.0% 14.3% 0.0%14 61.9% 14.3% 9.5% 14.3% 0.0%19 60.0% 5.0% 10.0% 25.0% 0.0%11 57.1% 28.6% 4.8% 9.5% 0.0%18 57.1% 14.3% 4.8% 19.0% 4.8%17 35.0% 30.0% 5.0% 30.0% 0.0%15 28.6% 28.6% 9.5% 33.3% 0.0%3 27.8% 0.0% 5.6% 66.7% 0.0%1 26.3% 42.1% 15.8% 10.5% 5.3%2 26.3% 15.8% 21.1% 36.8% 0.0%20 23.8% 38.1% 0.0% 33.3% 4.8%16 19.0% 28.6% 14.3% 33.3% 4.8%21 14.3% 38.1% 14.3% 28.6% 4.8%4 10.5% 0.0% 0.0% 89.5% 0.0%9 10.0% 45.0% 5.0% 35.0% 5.0%6 4.8% 0.0% 0.0% 95.2% 0.0%5 0.0% 10.0% 10.0% 80.0% 0.0%8 0.0% 4.8% 0.0% 95.2% 0.0%7 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% 0.0%

April 4, 2019 227


How Important is this Project in terms of Economic Vitality / Development? (Sorted by VI, then SI)

Project

Very important

(VI)

Somewhat important

(SI)


(SU)

Very unimportant


12 61.9% 23.8% 9.5% 4.8% 0.0%13 61.9% 19.0% 4.8% 14.3% 0.0%14 60.0% 25.0% 5.0% 10.0% 0.0%10 57.1% 38.1% 0.0% 4.8% 0.0%21 57.1% 19.0% 4.8% 19.0% 0.0%18 57.1% 9.5% 4.8% 23.8% 4.8%19 47.6% 33.3% 0.0% 19.0% 0.0%3 35.0% 25.0% 10.0% 25.0% 5.0%

11 33.3% 47.6% 4.8% 14.3% 0.0%17 33.3% 28.6% 14.3% 23.8% 0.0%6 33.3% 19.0% 33.3% 14.3% 0.0%5 30.0% 35.0% 25.0% 10.0% 0.0%

15 19.0% 38.1% 14.3% 28.6% 0.0%1 15.0% 35.0% 35.0% 5.0% 10.0%

16 14.3% 33.3% 4.8% 42.9% 4.8%9 9.5% 42.9% 19.0% 28.6% 0.0%7 9.5% 33.3% 28.6% 28.6% 0.0%

20 9.5% 23.8% 23.8% 33.3% 9.5%8 9.5% 9.5% 38.1% 42.9% 0.0%4 5.0% 10.0% 20.0% 65.0% 0.0%2 0.0% 36.8% 31.6% 31.6% 0.0%

April 4, 2019 228


How Important is this Project in terms of Safety and Security? (Sorted by VI, then SI)

Project

Very important

(VI)

Somewhat important

(SI)


(SU)

Very unimportant


4 60.0% 25.0% 10.0% 5.0% 0.0%1 47.4% 31.6% 10.5% 5.3% 5.3%5 42.9% 28.6% 14.3% 14.3% 0.0%3 40.0% 40.0% 15.0% 5.0% 0.0%

14 38.1% 33.3% 9.5% 19.0% 0.0%13 33.3% 52.4% 0.0% 14.3% 0.0%10 33.3% 42.9% 14.3% 9.5% 0.0%12 28.6% 38.1% 19.0% 14.3% 0.0%2 25.0% 45.0% 5.0% 25.0% 0.0%9 23.8% 42.9% 14.3% 19.0% 0.0%7 20.0% 20.0% 25.0% 35.0% 0.0%

11 19.0% 33.3% 19.0% 28.6% 0.0%8 19.0% 14.3% 28.6% 38.1% 0.0%6 14.3% 19.0% 33.3% 33.3% 0.0%

18 5.0% 30.0% 20.0% 40.0% 5.0%21 4.8% 38.1% 9.5% 42.9% 4.8%19 4.8% 19.0% 38.1% 38.1% 0.0%17 0.0% 19.0% 28.6% 52.4% 0.0%20 0.0% 19.0% 33.3% 38.1% 9.5%15 0.0% 15.0% 25.0% 60.0% 0.0%16 0.0% 0.0% 28.6% 66.7% 4.8%

April 4, 2019 229


How Important is this Project in terms of Recreation and Leisure? (Sorted by VI, then SI)

Project

Very important

(VI)

Somewhat important

(SI)


(SU)

Very unimportant


6 71.4% 14.3% 4.8% 9.5% 0.0%7 61.9% 14.3% 4.8% 19.0% 0.0%9 42.9% 42.9% 4.8% 9.5% 0.0%5 38.1% 28.6% 14.3% 19.0% 0.0%8 30.0% 35.0% 25.0% 10.0% 0.0%3 30.0% 15.0% 30.0% 25.0% 0.0%

12 19.0% 33.3% 23.8% 23.8% 0.0%13 15.0% 35.0% 25.0% 25.0% 0.0%21 14.3% 19.0% 9.5% 47.6% 9.5%2 10.0% 35.0% 10.0% 45.0% 0.0%

14 9.5% 47.6% 19.0% 23.8% 0.0%1 5.0% 20.0% 20.0% 50.0% 5.0%

10 4.8% 23.8% 38.1% 33.3% 0.0%19 0.0% 20.0% 15.0% 65.0% 0.0%11 0.0% 19.0% 33.3% 47.6% 0.0%18 0.0% 14.3% 14.3% 66.7% 4.8%20 0.0% 14.3% 14.3% 57.1% 14.3%4 0.0% 10.5% 10.5% 73.7% 5.3%

17 0.0% 9.5% 28.6% 57.1% 4.8%15 0.0% 0.0% 23.8% 71.4% 4.8%16 0.0% 0.0% 23.8% 76.2% 0.0%

April 4, 2019 230

TO: Town of Addison and 2019 Addison Bond Committee

FROM: Karen Walz FAICP, Principal

Strategic Community Solutions LLC

DATE: May 2, 2019

RE: Results of Online Surveys

The City Council of the Town of Addison has appointed a Bond Committee to make recommendations related to a possible bond election for November 2019. After the Bond Committee’s April 18, 2019 meeting, an online survey was used to gain input from committee members and Town staff about the 21 potential bond program projects. This report describes the technique and presents the results of the online survey. These results are intended to inform the Bond Committee’s continuing discussions; they are not intended to provide an automatic final ranking of projects.

Online Survey Methodology SurveyMonkey was used to deliver an online survey to participants. The questions were designed so that each person would rate each of the 21 potential projects according to each of the 8 criteria previously developed by the Committee. For each project and criteria, participants chose a rating on a scale from 1 to 10, with 10 being most important. Participants could also choose ‘NA’ for ‘not applicable’. There was also an opportunity for participants to make written comments about individual projects and about the bond program in general. The possible projects are listed in Attachment 1 and the list of criteria are presented in Attachment 2.

Lastly, participants were asked about the importance they attached to each of the 8 criteria. The responses to this question were used to develop a weighting system for the criteria, used in this analysis.

Attachment 3 is the set of all questions used in the survey.

The survey was available through a link provided to participants in email messages; it was available from Friday, April 19th through Thursday, April 25th. Twenty-five of the twenty-eight Committee members took part in the survey.

The survey was also provided to Town staff for their input. However, these responses were provided through a different email link. In this way, the staff and Committee responses can be evaluated separately. Seven staff members took part.

Committee Weighting of Criteria Attachment 4 presents the Committee’s input about the weighting of criteria. In this table, a weight of 4 is “Extremely Important”, a weight of 3 is “Very Important”, a weight of 2 is “Somewhat Important”, a weight of 1 is “Not Very Important”, and a response of “I’m Not Sure” was weighted “0”.

A weight of 4 would mean that all Committee members felt that criteria was “Extremely Important”. Three criteria were weighted 3.52 – Economic Vitality/Development, Safety and Security and Fiscal

231

Responsibility. Recreation and Leisure received the least weight among the criteria, but it was still weighted higher than 2.0, which would have meant everyone thought it was “Somewhat Important”.

Attachment 5 shows the results of the same weighting exercise, but for the input from Town staff. Staff

weighted “Improved Transportation” most highly at 3.57. Economic Vitality / Development, Strategic

Direction and Asset Management all were weighted over 3.0. Recreation and Leisure and Effective

Management received the least weight at 2.43.

Project Rankings The ratings by criteria, for each project, were tabulated and an average was calculated based on the number of quantitative responses. These ratings were then weighted using the values for ‘average weight’ from Attachment 4 (for the Committee) and from Attachment 5 (for staff). Attachment 6 provides the detailed rankings by individual criteria for the Committee and Attachment 7 provides this information for the staff input.

Exhibit 2 shows the overall ranking of possible bond projects. It is ordered based on the Committee’s ratings, with the highest-rated project listed first. The exhibit also includes the rankings by staff.

Project Committee Staff

3. Roof Replacements on Town-Owned Buildings 1 1

5. HVAC Replacement at Town-Owned Buildings 2 4

10. Keller Springs Road 3 5

12. Quorum Drive 4 2

11. Airport Parkway 5 6

13. Montfort Drive 6 7

14. Addison Road 7 3

4. Police Gun Range Air Filtration System 8 15

21. Special Area Study Strategic Land Acquisition 9 13

6. Projects recommended in the approved Athletic Club Update MasterPlan

10 8

1. Information Technology Initiatives – Smart City 11 11

2. Improvements needed to address Americans with Disabilities Actcompliance

12 10

7. Additional recommended Athletic Club Improvement Projects 13 9

9. Trail Rehabilitation, Expansion, and addition of wayfinding elements 14 12

19. Beltway Drive to Inwood Road 15 17

8. Les Lacs Pond Improvements 16 14

18. North Beltwood Parkway to Inwood Road 17 20

17. Landmark Boulevard to Dallas North Tollway 18 19

16. Beltway Drive to Arapaho Road 19 16

20. Artist Way to Addison Road 20 21

15. Beltway to Gillis Road 21 18

232

For the Committee, Project 3 (roof replacement) was most important, followed by Project 5 (HVAC). The next five projects were those that relate to improvements to existing roadways. Of these, Project 10 (Keller Springs Road) was most important. After these roadway improvements, the rest of the Committee’s top ten include Project 4 (Police Gun Range), Project 21 (Strategic Land Acquisition), and Project 6 (Athletic Club Master Plan improvements).

For the staff, the top ten projects are very similar, though the order is different. Staff included Project 2 (ADA) rather than Project 21 (Strategic Land Acquisition).

Four of the five top projects are the same for both groups. Project 3 (roof replacement) was the top project for the Committee and for staff. Projects 5 (HVAC), 10 (Keller Springs Road) and 12 (Quorum Drive) were also in the top five for both groups.

Other Comments Attachment 8 includes the written comments provided by Committee members about each project and the overall bond program. The last comment on this list, related to the Police Gun Range, is the only written comment from a staff member.

Next Steps The purpose of this survey is to provide the Committee information on their individual perspectives about the projects. It is not intended to be the Committee’s recommendation on the projects. At the Committee meeting on May 2nd, this information will be considered, along with other comments and discussion, and the Committee will make its recommendations to Council based on all this input.

233

ATTACHMENT 1: POTENTIAL BOND PROGRAM PROJECTS

Information Technology Proposed Bond Projects (1)

1. Information Technology Initiatives – Smart City

General Services Proposed Bond Projects (4)

2. Improvements needed to address Americans with Disabilities Act compliance

3. Roof Replacements on Town-owned Buildings

4. Police Gun Range Air Filtration System

5. HVAC Replacement at Town-Owned Buildings

Parks Department Proposed Bond Projects (4)

6. Projects recommended in the approved Athletic Club Update Master Plan

7. Additional recommended Athletic Club Improvement Projects

8. Les Lacs Pond Improvements

9. Trail Rehabilitation, Expansion, and addition of wayfinding elements

Infrastructure Department Proposed Street Reconstruction Bond Projects (11)

Current Roadways

10. Keller Springs Road

11. Airport Parkway

12. Quorum Drive

13. Montfort Drive

14. Addison Road

Future Roadways

15. Beltway to Gillis Road

16. Beltway Drive to Arapaho Road

17. Landmark Boulevard to Dallas North Tollway

18. North Beltwood Parkway to Inwood Road

19. Beltway Drive to Inwood Road

20. Artist Way to Addison Road

Special Area Studies (1)

21. Special Area Study Strategic Land Acquisition

234

ATTACHMENT 2: BOND COMMITTEE CRITERIA

Exhibit 2: Bond Committee Criteria

Bond Committee Criteria

9

Effective Management

• Facility consolidation

• Interdependencies

• Reduce excess facilities

• Value proposition in all

• Aggregate small properties

Strategic Direction

• Priority – Most important first

• Timing of project

• When, multiple years

• Manage and spend funds judiciously

• Invest in future

• TOA acquire to develop

Asset Management

• Useful Life usage

• Asset management - Red, Yellow, Green

• Minimize "deferred maintenance'


• Cost / Best estimate

• Future cost implications

• Consider encumbrances

• Fiscal management

• Corporate Sponsorships

• New avenues of funding

• Benefit to taxpayers

• Bonding capacity

235

Now that the Committee has received information on the individual projects and the fiscal aspects

of a bond program, this survey will allow each Committee member to assess the importance of

each project. Please use the questions below to share your assessment of each project. Rate each

project from 1 (not important) to 10 (very important) for each of the eight criterion. The responses

from all Committee members will be tabulated and provided to the Committee as its

recommendations to City Council are finalized.

1. How important is Project 1 (Smart City Initiatives) in terms of each Committee criterion? Rate thisproject from 1 (not important) to 10 (very important) for each of the eight criterion.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 N/A

Economic Vitality / Development

Recreation and Leisure

Strategic Direction


If you have additional comments about this project, please add them here.

Addison Bond Program 2019

Bond Project Evaluation

ATTACHMENT 3: ONLINE SURVEY

236

2. How important is Project 2 (Americans with Disabilities Act Compliance Improvements) in terms of eachCommittee criterion? Rate this project from 1 (not important) to 10 (very important) for each of the eight criterion.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 N/A



Strategic Direction



3. How important is Project #3 (Town-Owned Building Roof Replacements) in terms of each Committeecriterion? Rate this project from 1 (not important) to 10 (very important) for each of the eight criterion.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 N/A



Strategic Direction



237

4. How important is Project #4 (Police Gun Range Air Filtration System) in terms of each Committeecriterion? Rate this project from 1 (not important) to 10 (very important) for each of the eight criterion.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 N/A



Strategic Direction



5. How important is Project #5 (HVAC Replacements at Town-Owned Buildings) in terms of eachCommittee criterion? Rate this project from 1 (not important) to 10 (very important) for each of the eight criterion.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 N/A



Strategic Direction



238

6. How important is Project #6 (Athletic Club Update Master Plan Improvements) in terms of eachCommittee criterion? Rate this project from 1 (not important) to 10 (very important) for each of the eight criterion.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 N/A



Strategic Direction



7. How important is Project #7 (Additional Athletic Club Improvements) in terms of each Committeecriterion? Rate this project from 1 (not important) to 10 (very important) for each of the eight criterion.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 N/A



Strategic Direction



239

8. How important is Project #8 (Les Lacs Pond Improvements) in terms of each Committee criterion? Ratethis project from 1 (not important) to 10 (very important) for each of the eight criterion.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 N/A



Strategic Direction



9. How important is Project #9 (Trail Rehabilitation, Expansion, Wayfinding Elements) in terms of eachCommittee criterion? Rate this project from 1 (not important) to 10 (very important) for each of the eight criterion.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 N/A



Strategic Direction



240

10. How important is Project #10 (Street Reconstruction Projects – Keller Springs) in terms of eachCommittee criterion? Rate this project from 1 (not important) to 10 (very important) for each of the eight criterion.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 N/A



Strategic Direction



11. How important is Project #11 (Street Reconstruction Projects – Airport Parkway) in terms of eachCommittee criterion? Rate this project from 1 (not important) to 10 (very important) for each of the eight criterion.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 N/A



Strategic Direction



241

12. How important is Project #12 (Street Reconstruction Projects – Quorum Road) in terms of eachCommittee criterion? Rate this project from 1 (not important) to 10 (very important) for each of the eight criterion.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 N/A



Strategic Direction



13. How important is Project #13 (Street Reconstruction Projects – Montfort Drive) in terms of eachCommittee criterion? Rate this project from 1 (not important) to 10 (very important) for each of the eight criterion.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 N/A



Strategic Direction



242

14. How important is Project #14 (Street Reconstruction Projects – Addison Road) in terms of eachCommittee criterion? Rate this project from 1 (not important) to 10 (very important) for each of the eight criterion.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 N/A



Strategic Direction



15. How important is Project #15 (Land Acquisitions – Beltway to Gillis Road) in terms of each Committeecriterion? Rate this project from 1 (not important) to 10 (very important) for each of the eight criterion.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 N/A



Strategic Direction



243

16. How important is Project #16 (Land Acquisitions – Beltway to Arapaho Road) in terms of eachCommittee criterion? Rate this project from 1 (not important) to 10 (very important) for each of the eight criterion.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 N/A



Strategic Direction



17. How important is Project #17 (Land Acquisitions – Landmark Blvd to DNT) in terms of each Committeecriterion? Rate this project from 1 (not important) to 10 (very important) for each of the eight criterion.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 N/A



Strategic Direction



244

18. How important is Project #18 (Land Acquisitions – North Beltwood Pkwy to Inwood Road) in terms ofeach Committee criterion? Rate this project from 1 (not important) to 10 (very important) for each of the eight criterion.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 N/A



Strategic Direction



19. How important is Project #19 (Land Acquisitions – Beltway Drive to Inwood Road) in terms of eachCommittee criterion? Rate this project from 1 (not important) to 10 (very important) for each of the eight criterion.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 N/A



Strategic Direction



245

20. How important is Project #20 (Land Acquisitions – Artist Way to Addison Road) in terms of eachCommittee criterion? Rate this project from 1 (not important) to 10 (very important) for each of the eight criterion.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 N/A



Strategic Direction



21. How important is Project #21 (Special Area Study Strategic Land Acquisitions) in terms of eachCommittee criterion? Rate this project from 1 (not important) to 10 (very important) for each of the eight criterion.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 N/A



Strategic Direction



246

Please indicate the relative importance of each criteria, in your view. The weightings of all

Committee members will be averaged and used to provide a weighted project ranking for the

Committee's consideration.

22. What weight should the Bond Committee give to each of its eight criterion?

Extremely Important (4) Very Important (3)

Somewhat Important (2)

Not Very Important (1) I'm not sure (0)



Strategic Direction


Please add any other comments about these criteria here,.

Addison Bond Program 2019

Criteria Weighting

247

ATTACHMENT 4: COMMITTEE WEIGHTING OF CRITERIA

Person What weight should the Bond Committee give to each of its eight criterion?

Improved Transport-

ation

Economic Vitality /

Development

Safety and

Security

Recreation and

Leisure

Effective Manage-

ment

Strategic Direction

Asset Manage-

ment

Fiscal Respon-sibility

1 4 4 4 3 0 4 3 2

2 3 3 4 2 3 1 2 4

3 3 3 4 3 4 3 4 4

4 4 4 4 3 3 3 4 4

5 3 3 2 2 2 2 3 3

6 4 4 3 2 2 4 4 3

7 2 4 3 3 3 2 2 3

8 4 4 4 1 3 2 3 4

9 4 4 3 3 2 3 4 4

10 3 2 4 1 2 2 4 4

11 2 4 4 2

3 4 4

12 3 3 4 3 4 3 4 4

13 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

14 4 3 3 2 2 4 4 3

15 3 4 3 1 4 4 4 4

16 4 4 4 2 2 4 4 4

17 4 4 4 3 4 3 4 4

18 3 4 4 3 3 3 4 4

19 4 4 4 3 3 3 4 3

20 4 4 4 2 3 3 3 4

21 4 4 4 3 2 4 3 4

22 3 3 4 2 3 3 3 4

23 2 4 2 1 1 1 1 1

24 2 2 3 1 1 1 3 4

25 4 3 3 2 1 3 3 3

Average Weight

3.32 3.52 3.52 2.24 2.50 2.84 3.36 3.52

248

ATTACHMENT 5: STAFF WEIGHTING OF CRITERIA

Person

What weight should the Bond Committee give to each of its eight criterion?

Improved Transport-

ation

Economic Vitality / Develop-

ment

Safety and

Security

Recreation and

Leisure

Effective Manage-

ment

Strategic Direction

Asset Manage-

ment


1 2 3 4 3 4 4 4 4

2 4 4 4 2 2 4 4 4

3 4 3 2 1 3 3 4 4

4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 4

5 4 4 2 2 2 3 2 3

6 3 2 2 2 1 3 2 2

7 4 4 2 3 2 3 3 2

Average weighting

3.57 3.43 2.86 2.43 2.43 3.29 3.14 3.29

249

ATTACHMENT 6: COMMITTEE RANKINGS BY PROJECT AND CRITERIA

Project Improved Transport-

ation

Economic Vitality /

Development

Safety and

Security

Recreation and

Leisure

Effective Manage-

ment

Strategic Direction

Asset Manage-

ment


Overall Rank


2.74 6.13 7.58 4.94 7.13 7.33 9.17 9.04 177.46 1


2.53 6.20 7.56 6.22 6.96 7.17 8.88 8.76 168.11 2

10. Keller Springs Road 8.82 8.22 7.86 3.80 5.92 7.72 8.56 8.12 155.10 3

12. Quorum Drive 8.58 8.25 6.90 4.40 5.75 7.33 8.00 7.92 142.51 4

11. Airport Parkway 8.04 7.24 6.54 3.59 5.48 6.75 7.32 7.50 124.40 5

13. Montfort Drive 8.40 7.94 6.90 4.22 5.46 6.69 7.54 7.10 122.78 6

14. Addison Road 7.74 7.12 6.66 5.26 5.46 6.58 7.42 6.79 117.13 7


2.16 3.65 7.24 2.71 5.02 5.63 6.25 6.27 89.46 8


5.34 7.20 4.20 3.73 5.20 6.56 5.60 5.92 87.57 9


1.89 5.71 4.36 8.02 4.83 5.23 6.52 5.88 86.59 10


6.87 6.24 8.00 4.17 6.18 6.27 5.35 5.03 84.48 11


5.73 5.24 7.22 4.78 4.61 5.54 5.59 5.54 77.65 12


1.84 5.02 4.44 7.16 4.65 5.06 5.75 5.23 72.26 13


5.39 5.56 6.01 7.36 4.38 5.46 4.83 5.04 66.61 14

250


ation

Economic Vitality /

Development

Safety and

Security

Recreation and

Leisure

Effective Manage-

ment

Strategic Direction

Asset Manage-

ment


Overall Rank


6.32 6.44 4.44 2.79 4.21 5.80 4.64 5.08 64.72 15


1.95 4.36 4.74 6.73 3.81 4.00 5.92 4.69 61.28 16


6.08 6.08 3.80 2.91 3.91 6.00 4.68 4.54 59.95 17


6.00 5.70 4.16 3.04 3.71 5.63 4.04 4.33 52.09 18


5.04 4.50 3.33 2.77 3.50 5.04 3.65 4.22 44.75 19


5.16 4.78 3.90 3.00 3.44 4.50 3.88 4.21 44.67 20

15. Beltway to Gillis Road 5.40 5.08 3.25 2.77 3.36 4.96 3.46 3.78 40.83 21

251

ATTACHMENT 7: STAFF RANKINGS BY PROJECT AND CRITERIA


ation

Economic Vitality /

Development

Safety and

Security

Recreation and

Leisure

Effective Manage-

ment

Strategic Direction

Asset Manage-

ment


Overall Rank


1.57 5.71 6.29 4.00 7.29 7.29 9.29 8.57 162.29 1

12. Quorum Drive 9.43 8.43 6.86 6.43 6.43 7.57 8.57 8.67 156.66 2

14. Addison Road 9.86 8.71 8.29 6.00 6.29 7.00 8.86 8.17 150.17 3


1.00 4.57 5.14 4.29 7.43 6.14 9.14 8.14 147.16 4

10. Keller Springs Road 9.57 8.14 7.57 4.43 5.86 7.71 8.57 7.83 143.55 5

11. Airport Parkway 9.57 8.00 7.43 4.00 5.57 7.57 8.57 7.83 140.31 6

13. Montfort Drive 9.00 7.29 6.14 5.29 6.00 6.57 7.71 7.67 126.61 7


1.71 5.43 3.14 9.71 7.14 7.57 7.86 6.43 126.31 8


1.71 4.86 3.00 8.86 6.29 7.29 7.43 6.14 111.19 9


5.43 5.29 8.14 6.00 5.17 6.50 7.50 6.29 103.77 10

252


ation

Economic Vitality /

Development

Safety and

Security

Recreation and

Leisure

Effective Manage-

ment

Strategic Direction

Asset Manage-

ment


Overall Rank


8.00 5.29 7.86 5.00 6.57 8.17 5.14 5.86 102.57 11


4.86 6.71 6.00 7.00 5.57 5.86 5.57 5.00 77.82 12


6.57 8.14 4.71 4.71 4.71 8.29 3.00 5.57 70.07 13


2.00 3.14 3.43 5.43 5.86 5.14 6.14 4.29 69.14 14


1.00 2.00 7.43 1.00 4.86 3.57 5.57 4.71 55.47 15


7.57 7.86 4.14 4.29 4.29 6.43 2.71 4.00 51.02 16


8.29 7.57 3.86 3.43 4.00 5.86 2.57 5.14 49.80 17

15. Beltway to Gillis Road 7.29 6.29 3.57 3.29 4.86 6.14 2.14 3.71 48.25 18


7.86 5.57 4.71 3.14 3.71 5.14 2.86 4.14 42.87 19


7.57 6.00 4.14 3.86 3.71 5.29 2.57 4.14 41.94 20


6.14 5.00 3.14 3.57 3.43 4.86 2.29 4.43 36.77 21

253

Comments on Individual Projects

Person 1 2 4 6 7

1. Information TechnologyInitiatives – Smart City

the technology will become cheaper later and will be perfected later

Interested in learning more about Mesh wireless network & automated meter reading

2. Improvements needed toaddress Americans with Disabilities Actcompliance

This seems like the project lest necessary in the bond issue. While very important, esp for the lives of those with special needs to lead full lives, I feel the projects could easily be inserted into the Town budget over time and included in other projects, such as curbs inserted in roadway projects and door handles lowered with maintenance projects.

cheaper now than laterImproved transportation as it relates to handicapped persons

254


Person


2. Improvements needed toaddress Americans with Disabilities Actcompliance

11 15 18 21

Not suitable for bond funding. Technology normally has an expected life of 3 to 5 years.

not all of these individual items are of equal importance.

High in moral responsibility, not listed as a criteria.

I realize we have a 20‐year timeframe to get this done.

255


Person


2. Improvements needed toaddress Americans with Disabilities Act compliance

23 25 Staff

LPR and ATMS are the most important here. Meter reading, drone and mesh network would be nice.

ADA should be done as each repair, maintenance or replace is accomplished, not as a stand alone. Pricing for anything must include applicable ADA requirements.

Most of the access can be handled via other street projects. Elevators are very important though a grant might be available for Town Hall since it is a historic building (and might NOT be required to be upgraded).

256


Person 1 2 4 6 7

3. Roof Replacements on Town‐owned Buildings

This seems extremely important given the new AC units we will be installing soon. They need to be on sturdy, up‐to‐date roofs!

Water getting into buildings leads to mold remediation‐ guys in white suits and masks tearing into walls etc to treat mold‐ EXPENSIVE. Water inside buildings leads to more cost later such as mold remediation (men in white suits wearing masks) which is EXTREMELY EXPENSIVE.0 Replace roofs pronto!

It's imperative to budget maintenance dollars to ensure we're able to get the full estimated life value from these improvements.

4. Police Gun Range Air FiltrationSystem

This is important to the police, and having a well‐trained force is important to our community, even though it doesn't fit neatly into the criteria we set.

Need to remove toxins from firing guns. the largest of which is lead from the gun range and exercise room. Remove the toxins from the gun range and exercise room‐ keep first responders healthy. Get the toxic fumes our of gun range and exercise room to protect first responders and reduce potential health costs.

If we are able to address other maintenance issues through a bond, I would hope we are able to use dollars saved to address this item. This project is important to ensure our awesome officers are motivated to stay in Addison.

Can the police outsource or use another gun range?

257


Person



11 15 18 21

this item should be considered along with Special Area Study Strategic Land Acquisition in that a consolidation of Town employees would be effective, while repurposing land for sale to private individuals or developers would take a very valuable asset that could be used for Town revenues. Such a windfall could be used strategically for many purposes.

This is a MUST HAVE for the city. We cannot afford to have our buildings collapse or be comprised in any way more than they may already be!!!

I think first and foremost, we must address our own infrastructure. This provides bang for the buck.

High in moral responsibility, not a criteria

This is a "nice" to have.

258


Person



23 25 Staff

Since there has been an absolute absence of maintenance, for the safety and well being of our employees and visitors as well as to cut down on maintenance as well as FURTHER deterioration, Roof replacement is critical and a must.

Asset management plan says most of these are critical. Probably one of my top 3 concerns.

Buy memberships in the closest gun range which will have up to date air quality, range layout and practices, with out any town maintenance. Cheaper for a third party to have than the Town of Addison.

IFF could be used

This seems something like we could easily contract with another city or private provider to allow PD access to gun ranges.

259


Person 1 2 4 6 7

5. HVAC Replacement at Town‐Owned Buildings

Given that freon is illegal to make, use and even to import, plus the fact that these are 20‐25% past expected use, this is the single most important project being proposed for the bond issue.

260


Person


11 15 18 21

This is another MUST HAVE! We cannot Town assets comprised, period!!!

Again, this provides bang for the buck. We must have appropriately maintained facilities.

261


Person


23 25 Staff

Ditto this with item 3 Roofs. Town has foregone this WAY TOO LONG. Fix now, save further maintenance costs and lets make a living atmosphere for our employees and visitors to these buildings.

One of my top concerns

262


Person 1 2 4 6 7

6. Projects recommended in theapproved Athletic Club Update MasterPlan

Our club is a point of pride for economic development, but it is still a nice‐to‐have.

Increase fee for non‐resident use? Is there capacity to run 3rd party camps / instructional programs out of the fitness center to help increase revenue?

263


Person


11 15 18 21

I realize the Athletic Club is a great asset for the Town, but need to find another way to improve this asset. Currently, only a small %age of the Town residents use it.

264


Person


23 25 Staff

Based on the 216,000 number of visits and membership of 4,000+ in the club ( less than or near 25% of Town population), plus we know that not all of the 4,000 members use the club, it would leave approximately 2.5 to 3.0 visits per month for all of the active members. Moving the front desk to face the doors with a larger space does not answer the question of "we may have non members entering". If we cannot take care of and watch the 7‐8 feet in front of the present desk to the elevator wall, how does moving the reception desk enhance anything.

While these are master plan projects, fixing the pool and hot tub are more important in day to day operations.

265


Person 1 2 4 6 7

7. Additional recommendedAthletic Club Improvement Projects

Our club is a point of pride for economic development, but it is still a nice‐to‐have.


How many bodies of water do we have in Addison? What is the status of the others?

I feel this is a nice‐to‐have and if it is as much trouble as people say, why not just fill it in?

266


Person



11 15 18 21

I would be in favor of the Pool upgrades the other cost is a Nice to have in my opinion.

Les Lacs Pond needs another solution.

267


Person



23 25 Staff

Updating a massive list, rather than doing obvious improvements only spends money. Again the amount spent to the member usage is way too low to address this, when there are other needs that could use the financing better.

Fixing pool and hot tub are important. These lobby reconfigure projects are more important that those in master plan.

This area basically only had any oversight by the residences bordering the pond. The pond is a pond and should look like a natural pond, to heck with the curbs etc. Many ponds have dirt walkways as in national and state parks. Why is this necessary? Plus again, usage to population is too low to spend this recommended amount of funds

Le Lacs will continue to deteriorate without repairs.

268


Person 1 2 4 6 7

9. Trail Rehabilitation, Expansion,and addition of wayfinding elements

While rating high on our criteria, I feel this is a nice‐to‐have. I believe this $415k pricetag is something that might be a good target for a fundraising project through the Arbor Foundation and/or the Addison Legacy Foundation. I wonder if companies in town would be willing to make donations for signage recognition and a PR/Thank You event and campaign.


269


Person



11 15 18 21

I rated this #3 overall of all of the projects.

We must maintain our roads, and there are several road projects that are important.

270


Person



23 25 Staff

A trail is a trail, leave all alone. 'Trail' designates a path it is not intended to be a sidewalk. Provide maps of the trails, with "wayfinding" and descriptions of sculptures etc.

Nice to have but not priority.

Based on the current property owners on this street, why redo a short distance. And differently do not obtain additional right of way or broader side walks and median.

A priority from Asset management plan

271


Person 1 2 4 6 7

11. Airport Parkway

12. Quorum DriveQuorum is a critical connection for the future Cotton Belt

13. Montfort Drive

272


Person

11. Airport Parkway

12. Quorum Drive

13. Montfort Drive

11 15 18 21

The Monfort Road project does not rise to the same level of importance of Keller Springs, Airport, Quorum and Addison Road projects.

We must maintain our roads.

273


Person

11. Airport Parkway

12. Quorum Drive

13. Montfort Drive

23 25 Staff

Not even on the city infrastructure top two list. Post office and delivery service business can do with what is there. This has the smallest daily vehicle usage of the streets presented for reconstruction. Drop from list entirely.

A priority of asset management plan, particularly traffic signal. Less interest in transportation plan elements

If this is a designated route to the expected Dart complex where Town provided transportation from Dart terminal to business along Belt line etc will be to maintain our business environment, this is a MUST. If not a vital path to from Dart, forget this project. Second smallest daily vehicle usage,

Traffic signals replacement a priority. Less interest in master plan elements

Montfort is vital to our business partners. FIX

flooding issue a concern here

274


Person 1 2 4 6 7

14. Addison Road

Since we cannot break out basic necessary repairs from the beatification, I recommend all of the roads/transportation issues being separated from the other projects in a bond election. I am concerned that the big numbers for roads will cause a voting down of the whole bond election if everything is lumped together. At the same time, pulling out each road project as a separate vote would be too confusing, cumbersome and distracting for voters.

Rebuilt 2015

275


Person

14. Addison Road

11 15 18 21

While I realize Addison Road is a yellow and not red, it is also our Town's name and for that reason I would prefer not to wait to make the necessary improvements. I realize this is a tremendous amount of money....

Addison Road is a critical location and project, given proximity to the theater and conference center.

276


Person

14. Addison Road

23 25 Staff

This must have been just thrown in to make the list longer for street reconstruction. The CONDITION of this roadway is too good to do anything, when other roadways are in dire need of financing.

Not as critical as other road projects

277


Person 1 2 4 6 7


I was not convinced that any of the land acquisitions for road building was necessary. They all seemed nice‐to‐have and part of the strategic plan for the city. However, I believe we find ourselves in a financial position that requires us to focus on must‐haves.



278


Person



11 15 18 21

Nice to have, not a necessity!

Nice to have

279


Person



23 25 Staff

NOT a single additional property of any kind should be undertaken until the Town can prove that it can maintain what it has, can properly budget for maintenance and upkeep and has a use for the additional property. This is NOT NECESSARY and the timing is highly inappropriate to consider with the other more demanding needs for financing.

Can Farmers Branch help? If not, don't bother.

See number 15 commentDon't waste time on this project as Dallas would probably reject.

280


Person 1 2 4 6 7

17. Landmark Boulevard to DallasNorth Tollway


18. North Beltwood Parkway toInwood Road


If a developer thinks it is important let them roll it into their proposal to the city. Little need for access to Inwood from the west. Costly right of way acquisition.

281


Person



11 15 18 21

While this also could be a nice to have its not much money and it makes sense to me.

While this also could be a nice to have, it makes sense to me too include.

282


Person



23 25 Staff

See number 15 comment

See number 15 comment Inwood study recommends

283


Person 1 2 4 6 7



If a developer thinks it is important let him roll it into his proposal to the city.

284


Person


11 15 18 21

285


Person


23 25 Staff

See number 15 comment

286


Person 1 2 4 6 7


I was not convinced that any of the land acquisitions for road building was necessary. They all seemed nice‐to‐have and part of the strategic plan for the city. However, I believe we find ourselves in a financial position that requires us to focus on must‐haves. *I am especially not convinced of this one. When we created the dog park, we wanted it to be community only. this move would bring in more traffic to that park, making it less safe for everyone who walks over with their dogs.

Most calls for service to Addison police are at intersections along Addison Rd. Don't add another intersection. If a developer wants the street, let him roll it into proposal to the city. Calls for service from Addison Police is predominately at intersections along Addison Rd‐ why add another intersection?

Important for future Cotton Belt development

287


Person


11 15 18 21

288


Person


23 25 Staff

see comment number 15 Not critical

289


Person 1 2 4 6 7

21. Special Area Study Strategic LandAcquisition

While this meets our criteria for good, effective management and would help with econ dev, I believe the market should decide the best and highest use with the city's advise and consent. I would not vote for this project, and feel that if it is included, that those who disagree philosophically with the city helping developers buy land will vote down the entire bond package. This is the sort of project that makes the news and gets negative attention.

Developers can also acquire land

$15M is a lot of $ but with the proper development will greatly increase the tax base

290


Person


11 15 18 21

This is "opportunity" money that the Town needs to have in order to acquire valuable assets.

291


Person


23 25 Staff

Town has not "strategically studied what, where, why and use of what we have NOW. Do not need any SPECIAL study as outlined, since if the present structures/property are reviewed there will be plenty to "STUDY".

Revitalizing Inwood Road could benefit from strategic land acquisition as could Midway. Possibly some by airport.

292


Person 1 2 4 6 7


I haven't seen/heard any reference to the impact our new DART Cotton Belt station is expected to have on these various assets and how that impacts the towns previously approved strategic plans and transportation plans. Those might make some of the transport projects more important.

293


Person


11 15 18 21

We want to improve the quality of life for all the Addison residents. We want to live in a safe and secure Town that is fiscally responsible.

I found this format to be difficult... It is hard to make such weighty decisions in this format.

294


Person


23 25 Staff

"Transportation" had "walkability" ‐ listed, I guess this for all 250 that walk anywhere. "Economic" etc‐ left off The Town must be the PARTNER for each business or Addison becomes a ghost town. "Management", "Direction", "Asset", "Fiscal"‐ these are directly the result of our city council, directors and employees doing the right thing, morally and ethically, not a BOND issue.

295

Community Bond Advisory Committee Meeting Meeting Notes May 2, 2019

The seventh meeting of the Community Bond Advisory Committee was held on May 2, 2019 at the Addison Treehouse Event Room.

The committee members present: Bruce Arfsten, Taylor Bowen, Lary Brown, Colleen Campbell, Robert Catalani, Mary Jo Cater, Nancy Craig, Chris DeFrancisco, Ralph Doherty, Kent Domingue, Jerry Dougan, Darren Gardner, Margie Gunther, Brooks Haley, Susan Halpern, Edwin Keith, JT McPherson, Jimmy Niemann, Liz Oliphant, Suzann Oliver, Eileen Resnik, Craig Reynolds, Jason Rivera, Nancy Williams and Rob Wright.

Staff members present: Olivia Riley, Rob Bourestom, Hamid Khaleghipour, Shawn Cheairs, Janna Tidwell, Amanda Turner, Ashlee Powell, Charles Goff and Lisa Pyles.


Ralph Doherty opened the meeting with the approval of the April 18th meeting notes.

Karen Walz from Strategic Community Solutions reviewed the survey results from the online survey given to both committee members and Town staff.


Is it common for a bond committee and municipal staff to have such similar results on a proposed bond survey?

While it is not uncommon for staff and committee members to have similar ideals for what a municipality needs, the similarity in the results from Addison were higher than usual.

With a bond committee that is as small as this one, could one person’s voting input sway the results?

No outlier data was evaluated for the results of our study. We took an overall average of all the voting results to score the proposed projects. With this, a singular vote to one extreme would not alter the overall average to the point of significantly affecting the associated projects rank.

How much does the Town have in cash or liquid assets? Why would we borrow money if we have enough cash on hand to pay for the proposed projects?

296

Currently the Town has approximately $90 Million in liquid assets and cash, most of that money is designated for current projects and the rest is reserved as an operational safeguard. We issue debt to spread out payments over a long period of time and share the tax burden over generations.

The committee discussed which projects to include in the bond propositions and at what level to include them. Attached is a summary of those projects selected.

The next Committee meeting will be on May 9, 2019 at the Addison Tree House Event Room, 14681 Midway Road, Suite 200 from 5:30 to 7:30. The subject will be a discussion of propositions to propose.

The meeting was adjourned at 7:30.

297

# Projects $M3 Roof Replacements on Town-owned Buildings 4.0004 Police Gun Range Air Filtration System 0.3605 HVAC Replacement at Town-owned Buildings 1.5358 Les Lacs Pond Improvements 3.2829 Trail Rehabilitation, Expansion, and Wayfinding Elements 0.413

10 Keller Springs Road 12.90011 Airport Parkway 9.40012 Quorum Drive 26.30213 Montfort Drive 7.30021 Special Area Study Strategic Land Acquisition 15.000

Recommended Project Sub-Total 80.492

Modified Projects Under Consideration# Projects $M1 Advanced Traffic Management System 0.6002 Improvements needed to address ADA compliance 1.5006 AAC Locker Room and Gymnasium/Track Improvements 1.9197 AAC Pool Modernization 1.009

Modified Project Sub-Total 5.028

Deferred Projects# Projects $M

14 Addison Road 64.60015 Beltway to Gillis Road 20.30016 Beltway Drive to Arapahoe Road 12.60017 Landmark Boulevard to Dallas North Tollway 1.50018 North Beltwood Parkway to Inwood Road 7.20019 Beltway Drive to Inwood Road 16.10020 Artist Way to Addison Road 1.400

Deferred Project Sub-Total 123.700

TotalTotal Recommended 85.520

Community Bond Advisory Committee Projects Under Consideration

298



299


Agenda May 9, 2019 5:30 – 7:30


2. Approval of Notes from May 2, 2019 Meeting Ralph Doherty

3. Discuss Final Project Selection Ralph Doherty, Committee

4. Discussion of Propositions Ralph Doherty, Committee 5. Discussion of DRAFT Final Report Ralph Doherty, Committee

6. Next meeting –

a. May 23, 2019, 5:30 to 7:50 Addison Tree House Final Report to Council


300


The seventh meeting of the Community Bond Advisory Committee was held on May 9, 2019 at the Addison Treehouse Event Room.

The committee members present: Bruce Arfsten, Taylor Bowen, Juli Branson, Lary Brown, Colleen Campbell, Robert Catalani, Mary Jo Cater, Nancy Craig, Chris DeFrancisco, Ralph Doherty, Kent Domingue, Jerry Dougan, Margie Gunther, Brooks Haley, Edwin Keith, JT McPherson, Jimmy Niemann, Liz Oliphant, Suzann Oliver, Eileen Resnik, Craig Reynolds, Jason Rivera, Virginia Wallace, Nancy Williams and Rob Wright.

Staff members present: Wes Pierson, Ashley Mitchell, Olivia Riley, Rob Bourestom, Hamid Khaleghipour, Shawn Cheairs, Janna Tidwell, Amanda Turner, Ashlee Powell, Charles Goff and Lisa Pyles.


Ralph Doherty opened the meeting proposing approval of the May 2nd meeting notes. Minor changes will be made to the notes and they will be presented again for approval.

The committee discussed which projects to include in their recommendation to the Council and how to divide them into propositions.


Can the Town acquire land without money from bond proceeds?

The Town can purchase land without a bond proposition, however, this will be a difficult task as the Town may then not have the money on hand to purchase the property when it becomes available. Having bond monies set aside for land purchase allows the Town the flexibility to be proactive in purchasing available land when it is first on the market. If the Town must wait for or find the necessary funding, an opportunity to purchase the property might be lost.

Why do we include all the different roads into one bond program when the work will not be started on some projects for 6 or more years, and we could potentially have another bond issuance by that time?

Yes, the decision could be made to include only those roads that could be done in the near future and the rest could be reserved for a subsequent bond election. Putting a number of streets in one

301

bond program, however, allows staff to plan for the future design and then construction more efficiently.

Would the Town issue bond money for all roads in one proposition at the same time?

No, the debt would only be issued when the funding is needed for a specified project and not before.

The committee discussed which projects to include in the bond propositions and at what level to include them. Attached is a summary of the projects selected, and the associated propositions to include them in. The next Committee meeting will be on May 23, 2019 at the Addison Tree House Event Room, 14681 Midway Road, Suite 200 from 5:30 to 7:30. The subject will be the final report. The meeting was adjourned at 7:00.

302

Proposition 1: Roads (East West) 22,900,000$ Advanced Traffic Management System 600,000$ Reconstruction of Keller Springs Road 12,900,000$ Reconstruction of Airport Parkway 9,400,000$

Proposition 2: Roads (North South) 33,602,000$ Reconstruction of Quorum Drive 26,302,000$ Reconstruction of Montfort Drive 7,300,000$

Proposition 3: Buildings 7,395,000$ Improvements Needed to Address Americans with Disabilities Act Compliance 1,500,000$ Roof Replacements 4,000,000$ Police Gun Range Air Filtration System 360,000$ HVAC Replacements 1,535,000$

Proposition 4: Recreation and Lifestyle 6,723,002$ Athletic Club Improvements –

Locker Room Reconfiguration and Firewall Improvement 1,556,035$ Gymnasium and Track Improvements 462,679$ Pool Modernization 1,009,453$

Les Lacs Pond Improvements 3,282,110$ Trail Rehabilitation, Expansion, and Addition of Wayfinding Elements 412,725$

Proposition 5: Investment in the Future 15,000,000$ Special Area Study – Strategic Land Acquisition 15,000,000$

Total all Propositions 85,620,002$

303



304


Agenda May 23, 2019 5:30 – 7:30


2. Approval of Notes from May 9, 2019 Meeting Ralph Doherty

3. Discussion of DRAFT Final Report Ralph Doherty, Committee

4. Final Report to Council – June 11, 2019 Ralph Doherty

5. Plans for June 11, 2019 Meeting Ralph Doherty


305


The ninth meeting of the Community Bond Advisory Committee was held on May 23, 2019 at the Addison Treehouse Event Room.

The committee members present: Bruce Arfsten, Taylor Bowen, Juli Branson, Lary Brown, Robert Catalani, Mary Jo Cater, Chris DeFrancisco, Ralph Doherty, Kent Domingue, Jerry Dougan, Darren Gardner, Margie Gunther, Susan Halpern, Edwin Keith, JT McPherson, Denise Quintanilla, Craig Reynolds, Jason Rivera, Virginia Wallace, Nancy Williams and Rob Wright.

Staff members present: Wes Pierson, Ashley Mitchell, Olivia Riley, Rob Bourestom, Hamid Khaleghipour, Janna Tidwell, Amanda Turner, Ashlee Powell, Wilson Kakembo, Charles Goff and Lisa Pyles.


The committee discussed the final Community Bond Advisory Committee Report to be presented to City Council.

This was the last Committee meeting to be held. The Committee will next present the final report to the City Council on June 11, 2019. The meeting was adjourned at 7:15.

306

PRESENTED PROJECT COSTS AND ASSET MANAGEMENT SCORE 307

307

Project

Asset Management Score Cost

1 Smart City N/A 5,000,000$ 2 ADA Improvements YELLOW 3,800,000$ 3 Roof Replacements RED 4,100,000$ 4 Police Gun Range Air Filtration N/A 360,000$ 5 HVAC Replacements RED 1,535,000$ 6 Athletic Club Master Plan YELLOW 4,961,326$ 7 Athletic Club Associated Projects N/A 4,742,167$ 8 Les Lacs Pond YELLOW 3,282,110$ 9 Trail Rehab, Expansion, Wayfinding N/A 412,725$

10 Keller Springs Reconstruction RED 12,900,000$ 11 Airport Parkway Reconstrution RED 9,400,000$ 12 Quorum Drive Reconstruction RED 26,302,000$ 13 Montfort Drive Reconstruction RED 7,300,000$ 14 Addison Road Reconstruction YELLOW 64,600,000$ 15 Beltway to Gillis Road N/A 20,300,000$ 16 Beltway to Arapaho Road N/A 12,600,000$ 17 Landmark Blvd to DNT N/A 1,500,000$ 18 North Beltwood Drive to Inwood Road N/A 7,200,000$ 19 Beltway Drive to Inwood Road N/A 16,100,000$ 20 Artist Way to Addison Road N/A 1,400,000$ 21 Special Area Studies Land Acquisition N/A 15,000,000$

222,795,328$

308

FINAL PROPOSITION RECOMMENDATIONS WITH ASSET MANAGEMENT SCORES AND PROJECTED COSTS 309

309

Proposition 1: Roads (East West) Asset Management Score 22,900,000$ Advanced Traffic Management System N/A 600,000$ Reconstruction of Keller Springs Road RED 12,900,000$ Reconstruction of Airport Parkway RED 9,400,000$

Proposition 2: Roads (North South) 33,602,000$ Reconstruction of Quorum Drive RED 26,302,000$ Reconstruction of Montfort Drive RED 7,300,000$

Proposition 3: Buildings 7,395,000$ Improvements Needed to Address Americans with Disabilities Act Compliance YELLOW 1,500,000$ Roof Replacements RED 4,000,000$ Police Gun Range Air Filtration System N/A 360,000$ HVAC Replacements RED 1,535,000$

Proposition 4: Recreation and Lifestyle 6,723,002$ Athletic Club Improvements –

Locker Room Reconfiguration and Firewall Improvement YELLOW 1,556,035$ Gymnasium and Track Improvements YELLOW 462,679$ Pool Modernization RED 1,009,453$

Les Lacs Pond Improvements YELLOW 3,282,110$ Trail Rehabilitation, Expansion, and Addition of Wayfinding Elements N/A 412,725$

Proposition 5: Investment in the Future 15,000,000$ Special Area Study – Strategic Land Acquisition N/A 15,000,000$

Total all Propositions 85,620,002$

310

TOWN OF ADDISON...Jun 11, 2019 · Addison, Texas’ 2019 Bond Advisory Committee . Executive...

Documents

Transcript of TOWN OF ADDISON...Jun 11, 2019 · Addison, Texas’ 2019 Bond Advisory Committee . Executive...